..r... 


PRINCETON,  N.  J. 


No.  Case,  ^ 

No.  Shelf,__}_t^ 
No.  Book,    f^Q 


The  John  IW.  Krebs  Donation. 


BV  665  .S5 

Smyth,  Thomaa,  1808-1873. 
The  prelatical  doctrine  of 
apostolical  succession 


THE 


PRELATICAL   DOCTRINE 


APOSTOLICAL  SUCCESSION  EXAMINED, 


PROTESTANT  MINISTRY  DEFENDED 


AGAINST   THE 


ASSUMPTIONS  OF  POPERY  AND  HIGH-CHURCHISM, 


IN  A  SEHIES  OF  LECTURES. 


BY    THOMAS    SMYTH, 

PASTOR  OF  THE  SECOND  PRESBYTERIAN  CHURCH,  CHARLESTON,  S.  C. 


BOSTON: 

PUBLISHED  BY   CROCKER   &   BREWSTER. 

.NEW    YORK ;    DAYTON  &  SAXTON'.       PHILADELPHIA  :     HOOKER    &    AGNEW,  AND    HENRY 
PERKINS.    CHARLESTON,  S.  C. :    S.  HART,  BEN.      CI.VCIN.NATI :    WEED  &  WILSO.V. 

1841. 


CAN  ANY  REASONABLE  RULE  OF  CONSTRUCTION  MAKE  THIS  (l.  E.  THE  EPISCOPAL  SUCCES- 
SION) AMOUNT  TO  MORE  THAN  ANCIENT  AND  APOSTOLICAL  PRACTICE?  THAT  THE  APOSTLES 
ADOPTED  ANY  PARTICULAR  FORM,  AFFORDS  A  PRESUMPTION  OF  ITS  BEING  THE  BEST,  ALL 
CIRCUMSTANCES  OF  THAT  TIME  CONSIDERED;  BUT  TO  MAKE  IT  UNALTERABLY  BINDING,  IT 
MUST  BE  SHOWN  ENJOINED  IN  POSITIVE  PRECEPT.  [bISHOP  WHITE  IN  '  THE  CASE  OF  THE 
EPISCOPAL  CHURCHES,' 

I   AM,  —  SAYS    THE   REVEREND   THOMAS   SCOTT,  —  AN   EPISCOPALIAN,  BUT    NOT   A  PRELATIST. 


Entered  according  to  Act  of  Congrfss,  in  the  year  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  (brty-one,  by 

CROCKER  AND   BREWSTER, 

In  the  Clerk's  Office  of  the  District  Court  of  the  District  of  Massachusetts. 


S.  N.  DICKINSON,  PRINTER, 
Si  Washington  Street. 


THESE  LECTURES 

ARE      DEDICATED,      BY      THEIR      AUTHOR, 

FIRST, 

TO    ALL    EVANGELICAL,    OR    LOW-CHURCH    EPISCOPALIANS,     AND     TO     ALL     NON- 
EPISCOPAL,    AND     EVANGELICAL    COMMUNIONS,     WHOSE    COMMON 
INTEREST  AND  DUTY  IT  IS  TO  OPPOSE  THE  EXCLUSIVE 
ASSUMPTIONS    OF 

POPERY  AND   HIGH-CHURCHISM. 

SECONDLY, 

TO  THE  MEMBERS    OF    THE    SECOND  PRESBYTERIAN    CHURCH,  CHARLESTON,  S.  C. 

FOR  WHOSE  IMMEDIATE  BENEFIT  THEY  WERE  ORIGINALLY  PREPARED  ; 

BY    WHOSE    COUNSEL    THEY    WERE    PUBLICLY    DELIVERED  ;     AND 

BY    WHOSE    SUBSTANTIAL    ASSISTANCE,    THEY    ARE 

NOW     PUBLISHED    TO    THE    WORLD  : 

AND,  THIRDLY. 

TO    THE    REV.    SAMUEL    MILLER,  D.  D.    AND  REV.  ARCHIBALD  ALEXANDER,    D.  D. 
THE     LONG-TRIED     AND    FAITHFUL    ADVOCATES    AND    FRIENDS 


PRESBYTERIAN   CHURCH  ; 

TO    WHOSE    LABORS  ITS  BISHOPS,    ELDERS,    AND    CHURCH    MEMBERS, 
ARE    UNDER    DEEP    AND    LASTING    OBLIGATION. 


Fkom  the  unprecedented  haste  with  which  the  Volume  has  been  earned 
through  the  prefs ,  n.any  n^istakes  in  names  and  references  bo  h  ,„  the  b^  y 
of  the  work  and  the  Index,  may  have  escaped  the  notice  of  the  Author,  who 
has  done  all  he  possibly  could  to  avoid  them. 


ADVERTISEMENT. 


The  present  Volume,  while  complete  in  itself,  and  therefore  published 
under  its  distinctive  title,  formed  only  the  First  Part  of  a  Course  of  Lec- 
tures ON  Prelacy  and  Presbytery.  The  Second  Part,  which  will 
constitute  a  second  Volume,  and  which  is  in  a  state  of  preparation,  will 
embrace  discussions,  more  or  less  full,  of  the  following  topics :  — 

I.  The  True  Apostolical  or  Ministerial  Succession  claimed  by  Presby- 
terians —  in  which  it  will  be  shown  that  this  claim  has  been  always  urg- 
ed, and  the  ignorance  of  some  Prelatists  on  this  point  exposed. 

II.  This  claim  of  Presbyters  justified  by  Scripture  —  in  which  the 
condition  of  the  church  during  our  Lord's  Ministry  will  be  considered, 
and  some  general  topics  debated. 

III.  This  claim  of  Presbyters  sustained  by  Scripture,  continued  —  in 
which  the  arguments  from  the  Apostolic  Church  will  be  entered  upon. 

IV.  This  claim  of  Presbyters  sustained  by  Scripture,  in  which  the 
argument  from  the  Apostolic  Chiu'ch  will  be  continued. 

V.  This  claim  of  Presbyters  sustained  by  Scripture,  and  objections 
answered,  in  which  the  argument  will  be  concluded. 

VI.  This  claim  of  Presbyters  sustained  by  the  testimony  of  the  Apos- 
tolic Fathers. 

VII.  This  claim  of  Presbyters  sustained  by  the  testimony  of  the  Primi- 
tive Fathers. 

VIII.  This  claim  of  Presbyters  sustained  by  the  testimony  of  later 
Fathers. 

IX.  This  claim  of  Presbyters  sustained  by  the  testimony  of  later 
Fathers  and  Divines  —  of  the  most  eminent  Reformers  —  and  of  many  of 
the  most  eminent  of  the  English  divines. 

X.  The  Antiquity  of  Presbyterianism,  including  an  account  of  the 
Culdees. 

XI.  The  true  Liberality,  Catholicity  and  Security  of  Presbyterianism. 

XII.  The  Republicanism  of  Presbyterianism. 


BY  THE  SAME  AUTHOR. 

AN  ECCLESIASTICAL  CATECHISM  OF  THE  PRESBYTE- 
RIAN CHURCH,  for  the  use  of  families,  Bible  Classes,  and  private 
families.     Second  edition  —  much  improved. 

TRACTS  ON  PRESBYTERIANISM  ;  1  vol.  12mo. 

SOLACE  FOR  BEREAVED  PARENTS :  Or,  INFANTS  DIE  TO 
LIVE.  With  an  historical  account  of  the  Doctrine  of  Infant  Salva- 
tion, and  Select  Thoughts  in  Poetry  and  Prose. 

A  FORM  FOR  THE  SOLEMNIZATION  OF  MATRIMONY,  ac- 
cording to  the  order  of  the  Presbyterian  Church. 


CONTENTS. 


LECTURE    I. 


THE  NECESSITY  FOR  THIS  DISCUSSION  —  IN  WIHCH  THE  aUESTION  IS  STATED  —  THE 
NECESSITY  FOR  ITS  DISCUSSION  ILLUSTRATED  —  AND  THE  PLAN  OF  THE  ARGUMENT 
DEVELOPED. 

It  is  the  object  of  this  Lecture  to  explain  the  nature  of  those  claims  assumed  by  Prelatista ; 
and  by  which  the  right  of  other  communions  to  a  fellowship  in  the  privileges  of  the  one,  holy, 
catholic,  and  apostolical  church  is  denied,  2.  —  The  bigotry  of  Prelatists  towards  all  other 
denominations,  and  their  demand  for  the  investigation  of  their  claims,  3.  —  Some  of  the 
reasons  which  have  led  to  this  discussion,  5 — :  First,  This  discussion  of  these  high  and 
exclusive  claims,  we  owe  to  their  authors  and  abettors  ;  secondly,  we  are  under  obligation  to 
institute  this  investigation,  by  a  duo  regard  to  our  character  and  just  claims,  which  are  both  — 
this  doctrine  being  true  —  entirely  overthrown,  9; — thirdly,  such  an  examination  is  de- 
manded by  the  cause  of  truth  and  liberty,  13;  —  as  a  fourth  reason,  we  are  summoned  to 
this  enterpiise  by  the  claims  of  charity  and  peace,  18;  —  fifthly,  to  this  defensive  warfare 
for  the  maintenance  and  preservation  of  our  spiritual  rights,  we  are  imperatively  summoned 
by  the  memory  of  our  fathers,  20.  —  Note  A.  The  bigotry  of  Prelatists  further  illustrated, 
by  a  reference  to  their  opinions  of  the  different  christian  denominations,  23.  —  Note  B. 
On  High-churchism,  29. —  Note  C.  Dr.  Rice  on  the  necessity  of  this  controversy,  29  j 
the  call  of  charity,  30.  — Note  D.      Our  Scottish  fathers,  30. 

LECTURE    IL 

THE  TRIBUNAL  :    BY  WHICH  THIS  PRELATICAL  DOCTRINE   OF  APOSTOLICAL   SUCCESSION 
MUST   BE  ADJUDICATED. 

This  necessary  to  be  decided,  34.  —  This  tribunal  is  the  written  word  of  God,  34-35.  —  The 
question  at  issue  fully  stated,  37  and  44  >  1.  Many  churches  make  these  same  claims,  and 
therefore  we  must  try  them  all  by  the  written  word,  45;  2.  If  these  church  principles  are 
essential,  they  must  be  found  in  scripture,  48-51.  Note  A.  —  The  doctrine  further  illustra- 
ted from  prelatic  writers,  152.  —  Note  B.  Further  authorities  in  support  of  our  first  position, 
53-54.  —  Note  C.    Further  authorities  for  demanding  clear  scripture  evidence,  54. 

LECTURE    in. 

THE  SAME  SUBJECT  —  CONTINUED. 

3.  We  demand  clear  scripture  proof,  because  these  principles  constitute  new  terms  of  communion 
with  the  church  universal,  which  Christ  alone  is  competent  to  prescribe,  5G-60  ;  4.  This  de- 
mand is  in  accordance  with  the  doctrine  and  the  spirit  of  Protestantism,  60-67  ;  5.  This  de- 
mand is  further  made,  because  it  is  a  right  admitted  and  acted  upon,  whenever  needed,  by  our 
opponents  themselves,  67-74. 

LECTURE    rV. 

THE  SAME  SUBJECT  —  CONCLUDED. 
Recapitulation,  75-76;  6.  Before  allowing  to  fathers,  councils,  or  the  practice  of  the  church, 
an  authority,  coordinate  with,  or  interpretative  of,  the  Bible,  evidence  of  not  less  weight  than 
that  given  for  the  Word  of  God,  must  be  produced,  76-82  ;  7.  We  demand  this  unquestionable 
evidence,  because  of  the  unreasonableness  of  the  whole  scheme,  in  itself  considered,  82-87. — 
The  conclusion  from  the  whole  argument  drawn,  namely:  that  this  clear  evidence  must  be 
given  —  that  Prelacy,  however,  as  is  admitted,  is  not  thus  revealed  in  the  scriptures,  87-92, — 
Prelacy,  therefore,  is  untrue,  and  to  urge  it  as  fundamental  is  wrong,  93-94.  —  Two  inferences 
drawn  :  1.  Presbvtery,  as  contrasted  with  Prelacy,  is  characterized  by  a  fearlessness  of  scrip- 
ture, 94-96  i  2.  Also  by  its  reverence  for  the  Word  of  God,  96-98.  —  Note  A.  The  authority 
of  the  fathers,  100-101.  —  Note  B.  Teatimony  of  fathers.  —  Note  C.  Prelacy  not  m  gcrip- 
ture,  103. 


VI 


CONTENTS. 


f 


LECTURE   V. 

THE  TESTS    BY   WHICH    THIS    PRELATICAL  DOCTRINE  OP  APOSTOLICAL  SUCCESSION  MUST 

BE  TRIED. 

This  unbroken  succeaaion  to  be  proved,  not  one  of  ministers,  but  of  prelates,  106.  —  Thia  succession 
must  bo  shown  to  liave  oriffinated  with  Christ,  107.  —  This  order,  supposing  it  to  have  been 
thus  originated,  must  be  shown  to  have  been  designed  as  perpetual  and  unalterable,  107-108. 
also,  to  have  been  instituted  by  all  the  apostles,  under  the  guidance  of  inspiration,  10&-109. 
also,  that  it  was  made  of  fundamental  importance,  109-110.  —  We  must  have  equally  satis- 
factory proof  for  the  validity  of  every  subsequent  link,  110.  — It  must  be  shown  that  no  link 
is  wanting,  112. —  Also,  that  the  ordination  of  every  prelate  in  this  entire  succession,  was 
valid  ;  first,  as  to  the  form  of  ordination,  113-114;  secondly,  as  to  the  subjects  of  ordination, 
114-118  ;  thirdly,  as  to  the  ministers  of  ordination,  or  the  ordainers,  110-120.  — The  utter  im- 
possibility of  doing  this  shown,  121.  —  The  absurdity  of  the  whole  scheme  shown,  and  our 
safety  argued,  122.  —  Note  A.  Episcopius  and  Hoadly  on  the  succession,  124-126.  —  Note  B. 
Another  ground  of  uncertainty,  126. 


LECTURE    VI. 

THE  PRELATICAL  DOCTRINE  OF  APOSTOLICAL   SUCCESSION    TESTED  BY  SCRIPTURE. 

The  doctrine  again  stated,  127-129.  —  Disagreement  of  Prelatists,  131.  —  Our  present  object, 
132 — What  ha.s  been  proved  by  Mr.  Taylor,  133-134. —  Promises  claimed,  134.  —  Universal 
consent  for  presbytery,  135-136.  —  Prelacy  denounced  by  Christ,  137-138.  —  Opposed  to  scrip- 
ture declarations,  138, —  warnings  and  prece|)ts,  139.  —  and  to  scripture  prophecy,  140-141. — 
Also,  in  opposition  to  the  ministerial  commission,  142-144,  —  and  to  the  promises,  144-148. 
Note  A.  Variations  of  Prelacy,  or  episcopal  doctors  versv^  jure  divino  Prelatists. — 
Note  B.  —  Mr.  Noel  on  the  promises.  —  Note  C.  Presbyterian  succession  the  only  safe  one.  — 
Note  D.    Matbew  Henry  on  the  case  of  Eldad  and  Medad. 

LECTURE    VII. 

THE  SAME  SUBJECT  —  CONTINUED. 

Recapitulation,  155.  —  This  doctrine  equally  contrary  to  the  facts  of  scripture,  156.  —  Of  ordina- 
tion and  its  alleged  essentiality,  156-157.  —  Bishop  and  presbyter  identical,  158-161. —  Contra- 
ry, also,  to  the  decisions  of  scripture,  161-164  — Contrary,  also,  to  scripture  manifestations, 
164-173.  —  The  variations  of  prelacy,  and  the  demonstration  of  presbytery,  173-179. 

LECTURE    VIII. 

THE    PRELATICAL  DOCTRINE  OF  APOSTOLICAL    SUCCESSION    BROUGHT    TO  THE   TEST  OP 

HISTORY. 
Question  again  stated,  181-182. — Recapitulation,  182.  —  The  issue  staked  upon  the  historical 
proof,  183.  —  No  proof  for  the  very  beginning  of  this  chain,  185.  — Peter  never  at  Rome,  185- 
i.rr-.JPoter  never  Bishop  of  Rome,  187.  —  Peter  never  appointed  any  successors,  nor  can  any 
order  of  succession  be  determined,  167-194. 

LECTURE    IX. 

THE  SAME  SUBJECT  —  CONCLUDED. 

The  doctrine  again  stated,  195.  —  Recapitulation,  196-197. —  Our  confusion  thickens  as  we  ad- 
vance, 197-198 The  succession   evidently  invalid,  198-199.  —  Character  of  the  popes,  199- 

200.  —  The  Anglican  succession  defective  in  various  respects,  200-202.  —  So,  also,  the  Irish, 
202.  —  Further  illustrations  of  the  English  succession,  203.  —  The  papal  and,  of  course,  the 
Anglican  succession  antichrislian,  204-208.  —  The  Anglican  succession  invalid  since  the  refor- 
mation, 208  ; —  Derived  from  the  crown,  209-210.  —  On  Archbishop  Parker's  ordination,  210- 

213.  —  Other  flaws  in  the  Anglican  succession,  213.  —  On  the  Scottish  succession,  214-216 

This  succession  confessedly  broken,  by  the  undeniable  separation  of  the  English  church  from 
the  Roman  church,  216-218.  —  The  American  succession  also  doubiful,  218-221.  —  The  suc- 
cession can  only  be  of  the  strength  of  its  weakest  link,  221.  —  Objections  answered,  221-223. 
—  The  succession,  therefore,  assuredly  destroyed,  223-224.  —  Note  A.  The  character  of 
the  popish  successors,  225-227. 


LECTURE   X. 

THE  PRELATICAL  DOCTRINE  OP  APOSTOLICAL  SUCCESSION  BROUGHT  TO  THE  TEST  OF  J 

FACTS. 

Doctrine  stated,  by  Bishop  Seabury,  230;  —  and  by  Romanists,  231. — Recapitulation,  232. — 
Prelates  not,  in  fact,  successors  of  the  apostles,  233.  —  Not  to  their  name  or  title,  233-2.35.  — 
Different  meanings  of  the  word  apostle,  236-238.  —  Prelates  not  aportles  in  their  call,  239  ;  — 
nor  in  the  insignia  of  their  office,  239-242  ;  —  nor  in  their  office  itself,  242-246  ;  nor  in  their 
laborious  duties,  24G-250.  —  Oppose  preaching,  248-250.  —  The  parable  of  the  apostles,  253- 
254.  —  Note  A.  On  the  meaning  of  the  term  apostle,  S55.  —  Note  B,  Prelatical  opposition 
to  preaching,  255-256. 


CONTENTS.  Til 

LECTURE   XI. 

THE   PRHOATICAL   DOCTRINE    OF  APOSTOLTCAL    SUCCESSION    ESSENTIALLY  POPISH    IN    ITS 
TENDENCIES  AND  RESULTS. 

This  char^  disavowed,  257-258.  —  Necessity  for  discussing  this  topic,  258.  —  Tliis  popish  ten- 
dency shown,  first,  by  the  analogy  between  this  doctrine,  as  embraced  and  followed  out  by  the 
Romish  and  the  Anglican  churches,  259-:2(i2  ;  secondly,  from  the  fact  that  this  doctrine  and 
the  system  of  the  Oxford  divinity  are  essentially  connected,  262-2t)7  ;  thirdly,  from  the  unde- 
niably popish  character  of  this  system,  and  to  which  it  leads,  267-2C8.  —  This  proved  by  abun- 
dant testioiony,  265-274.  —  Note  A.    The  character  of  the  Oxford  divinity,  275-276. 

LECTURE  XII. 

THE  SAME  SUBJECT  —  CONCLUDED. 
The  tendency  of  what  is  called  Oxford  divinity  to  popery,  proved  by  numerous  facts  and  con- 
versions, both  in  England  and  this  country,  279-285.  —  This  system  prevailing  in  the  episcopal 
church  in  this  country,  285-286.  —  Our  conclusion  inevitable,  and  our  discussion  justifiable, 
287-288.  —  On  the  ground  of  this  doctrine,  consistency  requires  an  apostacy  to  the  church  of 
Rome,  288-292.  — The  doctrines  of  prelacy  and  popery  different,  hut  not  distinct,  289-292.  — 
The  doctrine  of  prehitical  succession  leads  therefore  to  popery,  293-294.  —  Note  A.  Roman 
Catholic  Letter  to  the  prclalists,  proposing  union,  295.  —  Note  B.  Peculiar  attachment  of 
preiatists  to  the  Romish  church,  296.  —  On  the  value  of  tradkion,  297. 

LECTURE    XIII. 

THE  PRELATICAL  DOCTRINE   OP  AP0STOLIC.\L    SUCCESSION    INTOLERANT  IN    ITS  TENDEN- 
CIES AND  RESULTS. 

This  arises  from  the  powers  implied  in  this  claim,  299-300.  —  This  shown  from  a  historical  re- 
view of  the  prelatical  character,  and  of  this  doctrine,  301-305.  —  The  spirit  of  intolerance  not 
abandoned  when  the  Ohurcu  of  England  separated  from  Rome,  305-307.  —  Nor  is  it  now  aban- 
doned, 307-309.  — The  laity  to  be  excluded  in  America  from  all  conventions,  309-312.  —  Pre- 
iatists, even  now,  advocate  compulsion  and  implicit  obedience  to  canonical  authority,  312. — 
Justify  absolute  anathemas  from  the  articles  and  canons,  313,  314.  —  Bishops  to  punish  the 
disobedient,  314,  —  and  to  do  so  by  an  inquisition,  315.  —  They  teach  that  civil  magistrates 
have  plenary  power  in  ecclesiastical  matters,  315-317.  —  Glory  in  intolerant  laws,  317.  —  Re- 
quire implicit  suhjoction,  whether  right  or  wrong,  317.  —  Exult  in  being  reproached  for  this  in- 
tolerance, 318. —  This  intolerance  exemplified,  318,319.  —  Prelacy  entirely  opposed  to  civil 
and  religious  liberty,  320,  321.  —  Subjects  her  members  to  a  foreign  influence,  322.  —  This 
spirit  cannot,  at  this  time,  be  carried'out,  323.  —  That  it  would  be,  if  it  could,  shown  by  the 
introduction  of  intolerant  epithets,  323-326.  —  Necessity  of  opposing  it,  327.  —  Why  they 
brand  us  as  schismatics,  327,  318.  —  They  teach  that  no  human  legislature  has  any  liberty  to 
tolerate  schismatics,  329. —  Presbyterians  not  open  to  the  same  charge,  330,331.  —  Note  A. 
Dr.  Bangs  on  prelacy  as  an  usurpation,  332.  —  Note  B.  This  intolerance  historically  illus- 
trated, 332-334. —  Note  C.  This  intolerance  illustrated  in  the  conduct  of  Bishop  Hobart,334, 
335.  —  Note  D.  Extracts  from  Dr.  Rice's  Letter,  (from  the  National  Intelligencer,)  on  High- 
church  principles  opposed  to  the  genius  of  our  republican  institutions,  335-342. —  Note  E. 
Tendencies  of  prelacy  illustrated,  342-344.  —  Note  F.  The  true  character  of  Archbishop 
Laud,  345-346. 

LECTURE    XIV. 

THE  PRELATICAL  DOCTRINE  OF  APOSTOLICAL  SUCCESSION  UNREASONABLE. 
The  three  prelatical  castes,  347,  348.  —  Review  of  the  intolerant  principles  of  the  system,  349, 
350.  —  The  province  of  reason,  351,  352.  —  This  doctrine  to  be  adjudged  by  reason,  352.  —  It 
substitutes  the  means  for  the  end,  353.  —  Prelatic  and  scripture  reasoning  contrasted,  354, 
355.  —  This  theory  sustained  by  false  and  sophistical  reasoning,  355-357.  —  Preiatists  differ 
from  each  other  more  than  from  us,  357,  358.  —  This  absurdity  episcopally  described,  358- 
360.  —  No  prelatical  distinctions  known  in  heaven  or  hell,  361,  362. 

LECTURE     XV. 

THE  PRELATICAL  DOCTRINE   OF    APOSTOLICAL  SUCCESSION  SUICIDAL. 

The  Anglican  and  Romish  succession  stand  or  fall  together,  365,  366.  —  The  Romish  church  can 
on  this  theory  recall  as  well  as  give  the  succession,  366. —  The  invalidity  of  both  successions 
shown  by  examples,  366,  367. —  Bishops  limited  by  the  power  of  the  Pope,  367,  368.  —  This 
doctrine  would  make  true  the  most  opposite  and  evident  errors,  369,370.  —  May  be  claimed  by 
one  church  as  well  as  another,  370.  —  Its  claimants  are  mutually  excommunicated,  370,  371.  -^ 
The  prelacy  cannot  defend  herself  without  defending  us,  371.  —  How  can  the  Holy  Spirit 
pass  through  an  unholy  succession,  371,372.  —  Destroys  all  chrisLian  hope,  373.  —  Repudiated, 
and  why,  374. 


Vlll  CONTENTS. 

LECTURE    XVr. 

THE  PRELATICAL  DOCTRINE  OP  APOSTOLICAL  SUCCESSION  CONTRARY  TO  THE  MORE)  AF- 
PKOVED  AND  CHARITABLE  JUDGMENT   OF  THE  ENGLISH  AND  AMERICAN  CHURCHES. 

This  (icclured  to  be  a  tUldehood,  377.  —  Proved  by  tlio  London  Christian  Observer  and  Bishop 
Burnet,  378-280.  —  Also,  from  the  articles,  canons  and  practice  of  the  English  church.  381- 
364-386. —  And  from  its  relbrmers  and  laws,  384,  385.  —  Also,  from  the  testimony  of  Englinh 
divines,  387-391,  — and  bishops,  391-391),  —  and  archbishops,  396-403,  —  and  from  Bishop 
White,  403-405. —  Note  A.  .Additional  testimonies,  406-410.  —  Note  B.  The  seatiments 
of  Bishop  White,  continued,  410-412. 

LECTURE    XVIL 

THE  PRELATICAL  DOCTRINE  OF  APOSTOLICAL  SUCCESSION  SCHISMATICAL   IN  ITS  TENDEN- 
CIES AND  RESULTS. 

Moaning  of  the  term  schism  in  the  Bible,  413  ;  —  in  the  fathers,  414  ;  —  among  prelatists,  414- 
417.  —  The  Anglican  chnrch  schismatic,  417,  418.  —  Tlie  Romish  church  schismatic,  418- 
420.  —  The  different  parties  in  the  Anglican  church  also  schismaticul,  420,  421.  —  The  Oxford 
divines  and  their  sect  schismatical,  421-403.  —  The  evangelical  party  also  echismatical,  423.  — 
The  prelatical  party  also  schisniatical,  425,  &;c.  —  Chri.-tian  unity,  425-431.  —  Scriptural  and 
primitive  meaning  of  schism,  431-434.  —  Ecclesiastical  meaning  of  schism  and  its  conse- 
quences, 435,  436. —  The  true  doctrine  of,  436-438.  —  Note  A.  The  necessary  tendency  of 
prelacy  to  unity,  both  of  spirit  and  of  ecclesiastical  association,  439-441. — Note  B.  The 
nature  of  schism,  442-444. 

LECTURE    XVIIL 

THE    SUBJECT  CONTINUED,   AND  THE    PRESBYTERIAN    CHURCH  VINDICATED  FROM  THE 
CHARGE   OF   SCHISM. 

Recapitulated  view  of  unity  and  schism,  445,  446.  —  We  are  branded  as  schismatics,  447,  448. — 
We  are  not  schismatics,  because  so  called,  449;  —  nor  because  in  a  minority,  449,  450 ;  — 
nor  because  ecclesiastically  independent,  450  ; —  nor  on  the  ground  of  heresy,  or  of  improper 
terms  of  communion,  451,452-454.  —  Presbyterian  liberality  and  prelatic  exclusivenesa  con- 
trasted, 452-454.  —  We  are  not  separated  from  the  Catholic  church,  by  separation  from  the 
prelacy,  454-457.  —  We  were  never  rightfully  subject  to  it,  458,459.  —  The  ancient  schis- 
matics identified  with  prelatists,  459-464. 

LECTURE    XIX. 

THE  PRELATIC    DOCTRINE   OF  APOSTOLICAI,  SUCCESSION  SCHISMATICAL.  —  SUBJECT  CON- 
CLUDED. 

What  is  implied  in  this  charge  explained,  465,  466.  —  This  tendency  exemplified,  467.  —  Proved 
from  their  definitions  of  schism  467-470.  —  The  Puritans  did  not  willingly  separate,  but  were 
driven  out,  470-472.  —  Their  exclusive  bigotry  is  schismatical,  as  prelatists  show,  473, 
474.  —  Their  intrusion  of  their  churches  and  doctrines  within  other  bounds  is  by  their 
teaching  schism,  474-476; — and  so  is  their  separation  from  Rome,  477,  478.  —  The  prelacy 
evidently  schismatical,  478,  —  and  divided,  479.  —  Why  it  is  schismatical  shown,  480-482. 

LECTURE    XX. 

THE  TRUE  DOCTRINE   OF  APOSTOLICAL  SUCCESSION  ASSERTED. 

To  find  this,  must  be  guided  solely  by  the  Word  of  God,  483.  —  Question  again  stated,  484- 
486.  —  The  several  meanings  of  the  word  church,  486-488.  —  Divided  into  several  denomina- 
tions, 488,  489.  —  I.  What  is  essential  to  a  true  visible  church,  our  belief,  489,  490  ;  —  and  1. 
What  is  thus  essential  to  the  being  of  a  church  generally,  491-496  ;  —  2.  What  is  essential  to 
the  being  of  a  church  as  it  regards  its  ministers,  497-.501  :  —  II.  What  is  not  essential  to  the 
being  of  a  church,  .502-509. -Note  A.  The  nature  of  ordination,  510-512. —  Note  B.  On 
Separation,  513,  514. 

LECTURE    XXL 

THE  SAME  SUBJECT  —  CONCLUDED. 

Recapitulation,  515. —  Uniformity  in  rites,  ceremonies  or  policy  not  essential,  516-530.  —  Of 
other  alleged  marks,  .530. —  When  and  how  the  church  is  to  be  sought,  530-532 True  doc- 
trine is  the  all-essential  mark  of  a  true  church,  532-547,  and  Note  A. 

CONCLUSION. 
Recapitulation  and  Huiumary  of  the  arguments,  and  closing  appeal,  551-558. 

INDEX. 


INTRODUCTION. 


Section  I.     The  Object  of  this  Discussion. 

The  subject-matter  of  the  following  Volume  is,  the  prelatical 
doctrine  of  apostolical  succession,  or  the  exclusive  claim  of  high- 
churchmen  and  Romanists,  to  be  the  only  true  church  of  Jesus 
Christ ;  his  oni^y  true  and  valid  ministers ;  and  the  only  sources 
of  efficacious  ordinances  and  covenanted  salvation.  This  doc- 
trine, and  not  episcopacy,  is  the  subject  of  our  animadversion. 
The  principles  involved  in  this  assumption  —  and  not  the  char- 
acter or  standing  of  the  protestant  episcopal  church  —  \ye  con- 
demn. The  tendencies  of  this  doctrine,  as  exhibited  in  its  past 
history,  and  in  its  necessary  influence  —  these,  and  not  the  per- 
sons of  its  abettors,  who  may  utterly  repudiate  and  deny  many  of 
these  consequences,  we  reprobate  as  anti-prolestant  and  danger- 
ous. Our  warfare  is  against  principles  and  not  men  —  in  defence 
of  truth,  against  the  aggression  of  this  opposing  system. 

High-churchism,  therefore,  in  contradistinction  to  low-church- 
ism  ;  prelacy,  considered  as  being  the  ultraism  of  episcopacy ;  the 
exclusive,  bigoted  and  intolerant  assumptions  of  the  hierarchy,  in 
their  wide  separation  from  the  peaceful  and  equal  claims  of  the 
episcopal  denomination  ;  this,  we  wish  it  to  be  distinctly  under- 
stood, is  the  only  object  of  our  reprobation.  Whether  the 
arguments  by  which  the  episcopal  form  of  church  government  is 
sustained,  are  valid,  or  of  greater  strength  than  those  produced  for 
presbytery,  is  another  question,  which  we  may  have  occasion  to 
consider.  This,  however,  is  not  our  present  inquiry.  That  in- 
quiry is  simply  and  in  substance,  this  : — Is  the  prelacy  the  only 
CHDRCH  OF  Christ,  in  this  or  in  any  other  country,  and  the 

ONLY  source  of  COVENANTED  MERCY  AND  EFFICACIOUS  GRACE  ? 
AND  ARE  PRESBYTERIAN,  AND  ALL  OTHER  DENOMINATIONS,  WHICH 
CLAIM  TO  BE  CHURCHES  OF  CHRIST,  HAVING  MINISTERS  AND  ORDI- 
NANCES   ACCORDING     TO    HIS    APPOINTMENT, ARE    THEY    IMPOSTORS, 

WHO    ONLY    DECEIVE    IGNORANT    PEOPLE,  TO    THEIR   GREAT,  AND    SERl- 
B 


INTRODUCTION. 


ous,  IF  NOT  FATAL,  INJURY  ?  This  is  the  question  to  be  answered, 
—  plainly  —  candidly  —  either  in  the  affirmative  or  in  the  nega- 
tive. 


Section  II.     Origin  and  Design  of  this  Discussion. 

Nothing  could  have  been  more  unexpected  by  the  Author,  than 
an  engagement  in  this  discussion.  The  whole  subject  was  for- 
eign to  his  tastes  and  pursuits.  In  common  with  his  brethren,  he 
was  accustomed  to  hold  it  in  abeyance,  as  unworthy  and  unde- 
serving of  any  mature  deliberation.  It  was  better,  he  thought, 
to  occupy  his  own  mind,  and  the  minds  of  his  people,  with  the 
practical  and  saving  truths  of  the  gospel,  and  leave  ecclesiastical 
polemics  to  ecclesiastical  agitators.  Circumstances,  however,  led 
him  to  discover  his  own  ignorance  of  the  grounds  of  our  denomi- 
national views —  his  inability  to  grapple  with  the  arguments  of  our 
opponents  —  and  his  incapacity  to  satisfy  the  minds  of  those  who 
sought  for  ministerial  guidance  and  direction.  The  manifesta- 
tion of  alienation  of  feeling;  of  haughty  reserve;  of  high-toned 
exclusiveness  ;  of  reluctance  to  associate  with  him,  or  in  any 
way  to  acknowledge  him  as  a  minister;  and  the  open  declaration 
of  sentiments  at  war  with  all  charity,  and  which  threw  him  out  of 
the  pale  of  Christianity —  at  various  times  and  by  various  persons  ; — 
were  still  further  inducements  to  examine  into  the  foundation 
upon  which  our  church  professed  to  build  her  claims.  This  de- 
sire was  strengthened,  by  observing,  that  by  our  total  silence  on 
these  subjects,  not  only  our  members,  but  also  our  ministers,  were 
generally  unacquainted  with  them,  in  any  thing  beyond  a  mere 
general  and  superficial  knowledge,  and  that  many  of  the  laity  were 
perfectly  ignorant  of  the  first  principles  of  our  ecclesiastical  polity. 
Hence  he  discovered,  they  were  open  to  the  artful  and  insidious 
efforts  of  proselyters,  and  were  easily  made  a  prey  by  the  cunning 
craftiness  whereby  they  lie  in  wait  to  deceive  and  to  insnare  the 
unwatchful.  For  many  years,  too,  there  has  been  a  growing  in- 
terest in  these  subjects,  gradually  extending  itself  through  the 
community.  This  interest  has  been  excited  to  tenfold  strength, 
and  universally  diffused,  by  the  origination  and  efforts  of  that  asso- 
ciation known  as  the  Oxford  Divines,  and  by  the  circulation  of 
the  Oxford  Tracts,  and  various  other  volumes  of  a  similar  charac- 
ter and  tendency.*  The  introduction  of  these  writings  into  this 
countiy  ;  the  terms  of  praise  and  exultation  with  which  they  were 
noticed;  their  re-adoption  by  many  individuals,  religious  newspa- 
pers and  periodicals,  as  containing  in  the  main  their  own  cherished 
sentiments  ;  the  republication  of  these  tracts,  and  of  many  of  the 
separate  volumes;  the  adoption  of  many  of  them  by  the  Protestant 
Episcopal  Tract  Society,  among  their  issues ;  and   the  zeal  with 

*  See  a  very  salisfactorv  account  of  the  origin  of  this  system,  iu  Note  A.,  at  the 
end  of  the  Introduction. 


INTRODUCTION.  XI 


which  they  were  put  into  circulation,  not  only  among  episcopa- 
lians, but  through  the  community  generally,  and  within  the  author's 
own  congregation ;  —  all  seemed  most  loudly  to  demand  investi- 
gation. This  conclusion  was  rendered  evidently  proper  by  the 
additional  fact,  that  these  exclusive  assumptions  were  made  the 
topics  of  pulpit  discussion,  and,  in  some  cases,  to  the  disturbance 
of  many  minds.  These,  among  other  reasons,  urged  the  author 
to  an  examination  of  the  subject. 

On  entering  upon  this  examination,  some  three  or  four  years 
since,  it  was  the  object  of  the  writer  to  procure,  and  to  read,  the 
writings  above  alluded  to,  and  whatever  else  was  most  important 
on  the  prelatic  side  of  the  question.  This,  as  the  work  will  show,  he 
has,  to  some  considerable  extent,  been  enabled  to  do.  In  doing  so, 
he  was  astounded  at  the  confidence  with  Avhich  our  error  and 
their  truth,  was  proclaimed  by  our  opponents  ;  at  the  triumphant 
air  with  which  we  were  called  upon  to  gainsay  or  resist;  and  at 
the  unblushing  effrontery  with  which  we  were  excommunicated 
from  the  church  of  Christ,  and  consigned  to  uncovenanted  mer- 
cies. These  assumptions  he  found  to  be  all  built  upon  the  doctrine 
of  the  apostolical  succession,  as  the  only  charter  of  the  church, 
and  as  the  exclusive  right  of  prelates. 

But  Avhile  it  was  easy  enough  to  procure  works,  in  abundance, 
in  defence  of  this  prelatical  theory,  the  Author  was  amazed  to 
find  so  little,  even  of  an  indirect  kind,  in  exposure  of  this  furi- 
damental  principle,  from  which  prelatists  have  deduced  their 
entire  scheme.  While  their  views  are  before  the  public  in 
every  form,  from  the  child's  catechism  to  the  full-sized  volume ; 
and  are  teeming  daily  from  the  press,  in  every  possible  variety 
of  shape  ;  and  are  held  forth  as  essential  to  the  very  existence  of 
the  ministry,  and  the  church;  there  is  not,  so  far  as  the  author 
has  ever  yet  discovered,  one  disii?ict  treatise,  on  our  side  of  the 
question,  and  upon  this  branch  of  the  argument,  in  print,  in 
America;  and  but  one,  recently  issued  by  a  methodist  cler- 
gyman, (and  only  seen  when  these  Lectures  were  far  ad- 
vanced,) in  England.*  The  Author,  therefore,  found  himself 
subjected  to  great  expense  and  trouble,  in  procuring  rare  works 
on  the  general  controversy,  and  in  discovering  their  incidental,  or 
partial,  discussions  of  this  topic.  While  there  are  many  valuable 
Avorks,  both  English  and  American,  on  the  general  argument,  this 
particular  part  of  it  appears  to  have  been  considered  as  unde- 
serving of  a  full  investigation  ;  or  as  in  itself  unreasonable  and 
absurd'.  The  Author  was,  therefore,  led  to  think,  that  a  distinct 
examination  of  this  prelatic  theory  — which  is  now  put  forth  with 
more  confidence  than  ever,  and  made  the  foundation  of  the  whole 
prelatical  superstructure  — would  be  equally  advantageous  to 
himself,  and  to  his  own  people;  and  serviceable,  also,  to  his 
brethren  in  the  ministry,  who  might  not  have  an  opportunity  of 

An  '  Essay  on  Apostolical  Succession/  &c.,  by  Thomas  Powell,  Wesleyan  min- 


ister. 


XII  INTRODUCTION. 

examining  works,  which  are  now  with  great  difficulty  procured.* 
In  order  to  secure  this  end,  the  Author  has  added  (very  many  of 
them  since  the  composition  of  the  Lectures)  authorities,  and 
further  iUustrations  of  the  points  in  hand,  from  works  in  his  own 
possession,  or  in  the  libraries  referred  to.  By  this  means,  at  a 
cost  of  time  and  self-denial,  of  which  he  had  no  anticipation,  he 
hoped  to  make  the  work  valuable  not  only  to  general  readers, 
who  might  pass  by  the  Notes  and  illustrations,  but  especially  to 
such  as  were  disposed  to  examine  the  subject  for  themselves, 
and  with  a  closer  attention. 

The  Author  has  spoken,  in  these  lectures,  as  the  defender  of  an 
assailed  citadel,  on  whose  walls  he  has  been  set  as  a  watchman. 
He  has  used  the  language  of  defence,  and  written  in  the  spirit  — 
not  of  aggression, — but  of  justification.  Still,  however,  he  does 
not  rest  the  merits  of  the  discussion,  or  its  necessity  and  import- 
ance, upon  the  correctness  of  this  position.  To  his  mind,  the  evi- 
dence of  its  truth  and  propriety,  is  clear  and  certain.  Every  just 
provocative  to  examine  this  subject  has  been  given.  The  assault 
upon  our  principles  has  been  beyond  all  precedent,  open  and 
avowed;  and  in  an  air  of  resolute  determination  to  circumvent 
and  destroy  us.  We  have  said,  and  we  repeat  it  —  that  nothing 
else  than  the  firm  belief  of  this  necessity  could  have  induced  us 
to  enter  upon  this  uninviting  —  toilsome  —  thankless  task. 

If  we  were  mistaken,  be  it  so.  We  have  no  controversy  to 
wage  on  this  subject.  We  give  our  views,  and  speak  as  impelled 
by  our  convictions.  Let  this  be  as  it  may,  the  subject  itself  is 
none  the  less  important,  nor  its  investigation  unnecessary.  Cer- 
tain it  is,  that  the  claims  involved  in  the  prelatic  doctrine  of  the 
apostolic  succession  —  referring,  as  they  do,  to  other  denominations 
also,  which  are  all  characterized  as  sects,  dissenters,  and  schis- 
matics —  are  now  promulgated  from  the  pulpit  and  the  press, 
with  a  boldness  never  before  exhibited. 

This  doctrine,  then,  we  should  understand.  Of  these  claims 
we  should  be  fully  apprized  ;  and  the  grounds  upon  which  they 
are  based,  and  upon  which  they  are  altogether  rejected,  should 
he  well  ascertained.  And  although,  to  many,  these  claims  ap- 
pear to  be  absurd,  and  unworthy  of  consideration,  yet  they  are 
now  advanced  as  unquestionably  of  divine  origin ;  as  sanctioned 
by  express  divine  authority  ;  and  as  demanding  implicit  and  uni- 
versal acquiescence. 

Section  IIL     Importance  of  the  Subject.     This  Doctrine  cuts  off 
all  other  Denominations  from  Salvation. 

The  supreme  imf)ortance  of  this  subject  at  once  appears,  when 
it  is  affirmed  that  this  doctrine  being  true,  then,  among  all  de- 

*  Having  matured  his  preparations,  the  expediency  of  either  delivering  or  of 
printinj^  these  Lectures,  was  submitted  to  the  determination  of  a  number  of  the  mem- 
bers of  llie  author's  congregation.  It  was  in  accordance  with  tiieir  unanimous  desire, 
they  were  first  delivered  to  audiences  composed  of  different  denominations  j  and  it  is 
by  their  cordial  and  substantial  co-operation  they  are  now  published  to  the  world. 


INTRODUCTION.  XUl 

nominations  of  christians  not  prelatic,  there  is  no  true  church,  no 
valid  ministry,  no  efficacious  ordinances,  no  authorized  ministra- 
tions of  any  kind  whatsoever,  not  even  in  the  solemnization  of  mat- 
rimony ;  AND  NO  COVENANTED  SALVATION.  Now,  as  \ve  Can  imag- 
ine THE  POSSIBILITY  of  uo  Other  salvation  than  such  as  flows  through 
the  channel  opened  by  the  covenant  of  grace,  this  conclusion 
is,  to  our  minds,  identically  the  same  with  the   declaration  that 

FOR  US  there  is,  WHILE  OUT  OF  THE  PRELATIC  CHURCH,  NO  POS- 
SIBLE SALVATION.  We  are  without  God  —without  hope  — 
beyond  the  means  of  grace  —  and  the  covenant  of  mercy.  This 
is  the  practical  bearing,  and  the  plain,  logical,  and  unavoidable, 
inference  from  this  doctrine  — A  QUESTION  OF  INFINITE 
MOMENT  TO  EVERY  MAN,  WOMAN,  AND  CHILD,  WHO 
IS  NOT  A  PROFESSED  MEMBER  OF  THE  PRELACY. 
This  doctrine  being  true,  then  are  the  millions  of  protestants  of  all 
denominations  now  alive,  and  the  million  millions  that  are  dead, 
consigned  to  the  blackness  of  darkness  and  despair.' 

This  conclusion,  the  Romish  church,  with  characteristic  cruelty, 
openly  affirms  to  be  unalterably  and  infallibly  the  truth  in  the 
case.     Extra  ecclesiam  salus  non  esse  potest."^ 

This  orthodox  sentiment,  as  has  been  said,^  was  beautifully  ex- 
pressed by  jiEneas  Sylvius,  afterwards  Pope  Pius  II.  of  blessed 
memory,  (Epist.  lib.  i.  ep.  369,)  viz:  "That  none  who  had  dis- 
regarded the  authority  of  the  Roman  pontiff,  could  at  any  time 
enter  the  kingdom  of  heaven  ;  and  that  those  who  had  spurned 
the  commands  of  the  apostolical  see,  should  not  have  any  occa- 
sion for  exultation.  Hos  enim  catholica  Veritas  7iisi  resipuerint 
ante  ohitum,  ignis  CBterni  mancipio  sine  intermissione  deputat." 
So  that  there  is  no  redemption  from  eternal  fire  for  those  who  do 
not  repent  before  their  death  of  their  disregard  of  the  pope's  au- 
thority. Pope  John  XXII.,  in  his  Bull  of  1317,  says,  on  his  infal- 
lible authority,  that  "  God  has  confided  the  empire  of  the  earth, 
as  well  as  that  of  heaven,  to  the  sovereign  pontiff'." 

A  labored  defence  of  this  exclusive  characteristic  of  this  anath- 
ematizing communion  —  whose  public  creed,  to  which  every  con- 
vert has  most  solemnl)''  to  swear,  is  little  more  than  a  vow  to 
curse  and  hold  accursed  all  heretics,  however  good  or  dear — may 
be  found  in  the  recently  published  manual  for  the  benefit  of  young 
ladies.* 

This  conclusion,  however,  we  must  explicitly  say,  though  in 
itself,  as  we  think,  inevitably  consequent  upon  this  doctrine,  as  is 
allowed  by  the  Romish  church,  is  not  generally  admitted  by  pre- 
latic writers.     Many  of  them,  as,  for  instance,  Dr.  How  and  Dr. 

1)  See  this  view  of  tlie  subject  fully  presented  in  'Three  Lectures  on  the  Sup- 
posed Apost.  Succ.  and  Aulh.  of  a  Christ.  Priesthood,'  by  the  Rev.  Henry  Aclon, 
Exeter,  1840,  pp.  4,  5,  and  72,  79,  and  which  I  have  seen  since  this  Preface  was 
written. 

2)  See  '  Cramp's  Text-Book  of  Popery/  pp.  46,  47,  and  395. 

3)  Charleston  Observer. 

4)  See  '  The  Ursuline  Manual/  N.  York,  1840  ;  the  whole  appendix,  and  espe- 
cially at  p.  513. 


XIV  INTRODUCTION. 

Bowden,  indignantly  repel  the  imputation  as  outrageously  slan- 
derous.' Bishop  Onderdonk,  also,  disavows  this  inference.^  We 
are  not,  therefore,  to  charge  this  opinion  personally  upon  any  in- 
dividuals, except  upon  their  personal  avowal  of  it.  But  our  pres- 
ent business  is  not  with  persons,  but  opinions.  We  have  nothing 
to  do  with  Dr.  Bowden,  Dr.  How,  or  Bishop  Onderdonk,  but  only 
wiih  this  prelatical  doctrine  of  succession — to  which,  as  it  happens, 
they  have  severally  given  their  advocacy.  Our  inquiry,  therefore, 
is,  what  is  the  nature,  the  tendency,  and  the  necessary  results,  of 
this  doctrine  ?*  Now  to  this  inquiry  we  can  give  but  one  answer, 
and  that  is  —  that  it  is  a  sentence  of  excommunication  and  repro- 
bation passed,  not  by  God,  and  guided,  therefore,  by  infinite  wis- 
dom and  mercy,  but  by  weak  and  passionate  men,  upon  nine 
tenths  of  the  protestant  world,  living  and  dead.  This  is  our  opin- 
ion of  it.  This  is  the  only  and  the  certain  inference  to  which  it 
leads.  And  yet  these  are  the  men  who  cannot  name  Calvin,  or 
think  of  the  doctrine  of  election, — which  leaves  the  fate  of  every 
man,  not  in  the  hands  of  either  priest  or  prelate,  but  of  a  just, 
wise  and  merciful  God, — "without  the  strongest  feelings  of  indig- 
nation," and  "  their  blood  running  cold,"^  while  they  coolly  con- 
sign millions  to  a  fate  beyond  the  reach  of  mere)'' ; — just  as  the 
king  of  France  expressed  his  tender  sympathy  for  the  Admiral  de 
Coligny,  after  having  himself  procured  his  assassination.  ^ 

1)  The  amount  of  the  reserve  imposed  upon  the  full  application  of  thoir  princi- 
ples may  be  stated  in  the  words  of  Dr.  How,  ( Vind.  p.  44  :)  "  We  are  very  far  from 
saying  that  there  is  no  possibility  of  salvation  out  of  the  visible  cliurch.  God  forbid  ! 
It  is,  indeed,  in  the  visil>le  church  alone  that  God  has  deposited  his  covenant;  such  as 
fail  to  enter  that  church,  therefore,  cannot  b«  considered  as  in  a  covenanted  state. 
Still  they  are  in  the  hands  of  a  merciful  Being,  who  makes  due  allowance  for  the 
errors  of  his  frail  creatures; — pardoning  and  receiving  all  who  sincerely  desire  and 
endeavor  to  know  and  to  do  his  will." 

2)  '  Works  on  Episcopacy,'  vol.  ii.  p.  181. 

3)  But  then,  tn  use  the  language  of  Bishop  Jlcllvaine,  (pp.  173,  30G,  348,  and  see 
pp.  452,  and  527;)  '•  Their  doctrine  is  now  public  properly,  doing  its  good  or  evil,  inde- 
pendently of  its  authors  ;  just  as  a  poison  or  a  medicine  works  its  health  or  death  in 
those  who  take  it,  independently  of  the  apothecary  who  compounded  it.  The  public 
inust  judge  of  the  compound,  as  to  its  nature  and  conse(]uences,  without  being  bound 
by  the  opinion  of  the  apothecary.  And  so  the  public  will  and  can  make  the  true  in- 
ference as  to  whether  Oxford  divinity  is  essentially  as  much  a  system  of  human  merits 
as  that  of  Rome,  without  being  governed  by  the  deductions  of  Oxford  divines." 

"  Many  a  man  professes  entire  renunciation  of  doctrines,  to  which  his  system  direct- 
ly tends  ;  and  of  practices  of  which  his  principles  and  frame  of  mind  contain  already 
the  swelling  germ  and  essence." 

"  It  will  be  remembered,  that  this  external  instrument  (baptism,)  is  made  absolutely 
necessary  to  salvation,  by  Oxford  divines  There  is  no  regeneration,  no  justification, 
and  therefore  no  entrance  to  Heaven  without  it ;  before  it  is  applied,  faith  is  dead, 
and  incapable  of  any  instrumentality,  except  as  it  prepares  for,  or  leads  to  baptism, 
or  except  as  '  restitution'  of  stolen  goods  on  the  part  of  a  thief,  would  be  instrumental 
in  justification." 

4)  "  The  absurdities  of  Calvinism,  like  those  of  popery,  if  left  unopposed,  would 
have  produced  universal  infidelity."  (Dr  How's  Vind.  of  tip.  Ch.  p.  12.)  So  also  the 
episcopal  church  is  represented  as  "  atfording  an  asylum  to  those  whom  the  absurdity 
of  Calvinism  would  otherwise  lead  first  to  .socinianism  and  then  to  open  infidelity." 
(Ibid,  p.  I'J.) 

"  Now,  it  is  a  fundamental  rule  with  respect  to  a  dilemma,"  says  Dr.  Bowden, 
"  that  when  it  can  be  retorted,  it  is  good  for  nothing."  (Works  on  Episco.  vol. 
i.  p.  10!).) 

5)  See  Dr.  How's  Vind.  pp.  3G4,  372.  But,  after  all,  we  must  say,  with  Dr. 
How,  when  he  will  insist  upon  the  uncharitableness  of  our  presbylerian  standards,  in 


INTRODUCTION.  XV 

The  ground  upon  which  this  conclusion  is  denied  by  prelatists, 
is  the  unscriptural  and  baseless  dogma  of  uncovenanted  mere}'. 
"  But  how,"  asks  Counsellor  Bristed,' —  himself  an  episcopalian,  — 
"do  our  deep  divines  establish  their  position,  that  non-episcopa- 
lians have  no  covenant  claim  to  salvation,  seeing  that  they  do  not 
pretend  to  adduce  one  syllable  from  the  scriptures  in  support  of 
their  theory  ?  If  it  appear  from  the  Bible,  that  God  has  promised 
eternal  life  to  those  who  believe  in  Christ,  without  putting  in  any 
clause  of  exception  against  non-episcopalians,  then  they  have  a 
claim  upon  covenant  mercy.  And  if  the  Bible  contains  such  a 
clogged  promise,  confining  ealvation  exclusively  to  the  episcopal 
channel,  by  what  authority  do  our  theologues  undertake  to  assert, 
that  any  non-episcopalian  can  escape  damnation,  since  the  scrip- 
tures say  nothing  about  uncovenanted  mercy  1  and  they  both 
assert,  that  communion  with  the  episcopal  priesthood  is  an  indis- 
pensable condition  of  salvation." 

"  One  of  the  theologians  iterates,  and  reiterates,  his  candid  con- 
viction, that  all  in  communion  with  the  episcopal  church  are  in 
covenant  with  God  ;  and  that  all  others  are  aliens  from  the  com- 
monwealth of  Israel,  strangers  to  the  covenant  of  promise,  and 
have  no  hope  but  in  the  Ziwcovenanted  mercy  of  God.  He  then 
proceeds  to  charge  the  presbyterians  with  entertaining  a  similar 
opinion,  with  excluding  from  the  christian  covenant  all,  save  pres- 
byterians ;  and  pronouncing  all,  who  do  not  embrace  the  rigid 
peculiarities  of  Calvinism,  to  be  in  an  unregenerate  state,  and 
left  to  uncovenanted  mercy." 

"I  believe  it  would  not  be  easy  to  find  any  Calvinistic  presby- 
terian  so  very  ignorant  of  the  Bible,  as  ever  to  speak  about  uncov- 
enanted mercy;  so  entirely  unacquainted  with  the  gospel  plan  of 
redemption,  as  to  dream  of  any  mercy,  other  than  what  is  prom- 
ised by  the  covenant  of  grace  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ." 

"The  truth  is,  Calvinistic  presbyterians  profess  to  believe  that, 
by  the  covenant  of  grace,  salvation  is  promised  to  all  who  really 
repent  of  sin,  and  sincerely  believe  in  Christ  as  the  great  propitia- 
tion for  sin,  to  whatever  church  they  may  belong  ;  nay,  although 
they  bear  no  relation  to  any  visible  church." 

spite  of  a]l  evidence,  —  "Here  is  a  great  display  of  candor,  (charity- ;)  but  I  am  sorry 
to  be  obliged  to  add,  it  is  nothing  more  than  a  display."  (p.  373.)  "  The  whole  is  a 
mere  evasion,  founded  on  the  vague  meaning  of  a  phrase."  (p.  382.) 

"And  it  will  not  be  denied,"  says  Dr.  Mitchell,  (Presb.  Letters,  p.  285,)  "  that  if 
piety  consist  in  confining  the  favor  of  God  and  the  benefits  of  Christ's  manifestation  in 
the  flesh,  to  themselves  and  their  little  parly,  and  in  shutting  the  gates  of  heaven  against 
all  protestants  who  differed  from  them  ;  in  inventing  and  embracing,  with  enthusiasm, 
a  new  doctrine,  never  heard  of  before  their  time;  1  mean,  that  their  baptism,  and  no 
other  baptism,  conlers  immortality  on  the  souls  of  men,  and  (lest  their  adversaries 
should  get  oflT  with  annihilation,  and  thus  escape  the  damnation  of  hell.)  that  God,  by 
an  act  of  omnipotence,  confers  immortality  on  all  English,  Irish  and  Scottish  protest- 
ants, who  are  not  non-jurors,  that  they  may  be  damned  to  eternity  ;  —  if,  I  say,  piety 
consist  in  broaching,  publishing  and  defending  such  doctrines  as  these,  which  are 
enough  to  make  '  the  ears  of  him  that  heareth  iliem  to  tingle,'  and  his  hair  to  stand  on 
end  ;  then  it  will  be  universally  allowed,  that  those  learned  and  conscientious  divines 
were  the  most  pious  men,  that  ever  lived  in  England,  or  any  where  else." 

1)  '  Thoughts  on  the  Anglican  and  Anglo-American  Churches,'  New  York,  1822, 
p.  433. 


XVI  INTRODUCTION. 

"  Are  such  men,"  asks  Mr.  Bristed,  after  enumerating  Luther 
and  Calvin,  and  a  number  of  others,'  "  of  whom  the  world  was  not 
worthy,  to  be  excluded  from  Christian  fellowship  ;  to  be  shut  out 
from  the  communion  of  the  saints ;  to  be  consigned  over  to  the 
uncovenanted  mercy  of  God  ?  Is  not  the  covenant  of  grace 
made  with  all  true  believers  ?  with  all  those  who,  feeling  them- 
selves to  be  sinners,  fly  unto  God  for  mercy,  through  Christ;  and 
to  whom  God  gives  the  Holy  Spirit,  which  first  regenerates,  and 
then  progressively  sanctifies  them  both  in  heart  and  in  life  ?  with 
all  those  who  find  peace  from  the  Son  of  God,  and  from  the  Spirit 
of  God ;  from  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  forgiveness  ;  from  the  Holy 
Ghost,  sanctification  ;  with  all  those,  who,  under  the  sanctifying 
influences  of  the  Spirit,  are  assured,  that  although  sin  still  remains 
lurking  in  the  deeper  folds,  and  buried  in  the  inmost  recesses  of 
the  heart,  it  shall  not  regain  dominion,  nor  shall  they  come  into 
condemnation  ;  but,  being 'accepted  in  the  beloved,  shall  give  evi- 
dence of  what  manner  of  spirit  is  in  them,  by  wishing  what  the 
Father  wishes,  and  hating  what  the  Father  hates  ?  with  all  those 
who  study  the  holy  scriptures,  with  prayer  for  forgiveness 
through  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  for  assurance  of  pardon  through 
the  Holy  Spirit,  and  for  grace  to  obey  the  commandments  of  God  ; 
seeing,  that  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost  is  promised  to  all  those, 
who,  despairing  of  themselves,  rest  for  righteousness  on  the  Son 
of  God  ?  " 

"  Is  not  salvation  altogether  individual  ?  Can  one  man  be  saved 
by  another's  faith,  or  damned  by  another's  works?  The  declara- 
tion of  Jehovah  himself  is,  '  he  that  believeth,  shall  be  saved ;  he 
that  believeth  not,  shall  be  damned.' " 

"  Erasmus,  when  he  became  acquainted  with  the  persecuted 
Puritans  in  England,  exclaimed,  '  May  I  live  their  life,  and  die 
their  death  !  '  " 

On  this  subject,  Mr.  Bristed,"  after  quoting  from  two  American 
divines,  further  says  :  "  The  same  doctrine  is  repeated  again  and 
again,  by  another  distinguished  divine  of  the  same  school,  in  his 
'Vindication'  of  the  American  Anglo-church ;  and  if  these  two 
theologians  be  right,  that  God  has  made  7io  covenant  with  any 
people  in  the  United  States,  except  the  two  hundred  and  fifty 
thousand  bishops,  priests,  deacons,  and  laics,  so  thinly  scattered 
over  their  surface,  wo  betide  the  ten  millions  of  all  the  other 
American  denominations !  For  the  scheme  of  ziTzcovenanted 
mercy  cannot  help  the  poor  presbyterians,  congregationalists, 
baptists,  methodists,  or  any  other  non-episcopalians,  simply  be- 
cause no  such  scheme  is  to  be  found  in  the  Bible,  which  uni- 
formly represents  God  as,  out  of  Christ,  a  consuming  fire,  and 
in  Christ,  as  reconciling  the  world  unto  himself,  not  imputing  to 
them  their  trespasses  and  sins." 

"  In  reference  to  this  doctrine,  one  of  the  greatest  divines  of  the 

1)  'Thoughls.'&c.  p.  415. 
1)  Ibid.pp.  419,  420,  421. 


INTRODUCTION.  XVll 

present,  or  of  any  former  age,  observes :  "  "Warrant  for  this 
sweeping  sentence  of  proscription,  from  the  word  of  God,  none 
has  or  can  be  produced.  To  unchurch  with  a  dash  of  the  pen, 
ail  the  non-episcopalian  denominations  under  heaven,  and  cast 
their  members  indiscriminately  into  a  condition  worse  than  that 
of  the  very  heathen,  is,  to  say  the  least  of  it,  a  most  dreadful  ex- 
communication ;  and,  if  not  clearly  enjoined  by  the  authority  of 
God,  as  criminal  as  it  is  dreadful. 

"  That  all  those  glorious  churches,  which  have  flourished  in 
Geneva,  Holland,  France,  Scotland,  England,  Ireland,  since  the 
Reformation;  and  all  which  have  spread,  and  are  spreading 
throughout  this  vast  Continent;  that  those  heroes  of  the  truth, 
who,  though  they  bowed  not  to  the  mitre,  rescued  millions  from 
the  man  of  sin,  lighted  up  the  lamp  of  genuine  religion,  and  left 
it  burning  with  a  pure  and  steady  flame,  to  the  generation  follow- 
ing ;  that  all  those  faithful  ministers,  and  all  those  private  chris- 
tians, who,  though  not  of  the  hierarchy,  adorned  the  doctrine  of 
God,  their  Saviour,  living  in  faith,  dying  in  faith,  scores,  hundreds, 
thousands  of  them,  going  away  to  their  Father's  house,  under  the 
strong  consolations  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  with  anticipated  heaven  in 
their  hearts,  and  its  hallelujahs  on  their  lips  ;  that  all,  all  were 
without  the  pale  of  the  visible  church,  were  destitute  of  cove- 
nanted grace,  and  left  the  world,  without  any  chance  for  eternal 
life,  but  that  unpledged,  unpromised  mercy,  which  their  accusers 
charitably  hope,  may  be  extended  to  such  as  labor  under  invol- 
untary, or  unavoidable  error,  and  this  merely  because  they  re- 
nounced episcopacy;  are  positions  of  such  deep-toned  horror,  as 
may  well  make  our  hair  stand  up  like  quills  upon  the  fretful  por- 
cupine, and  freeze  the  warm  blood  at  its  fountain." 

Hear  also,  on  this  subject.  Archbishop  Whateley.»  "To  de- 
cide what  persons  can  or  cannot  be  members  of  the  same  religious 
community  on  earth,  uniting  in  public  worship  and  other  observ- 
ances, is  no  more  than  it  is  possible,  and  allowable,  and  requi- 
site, for  uninspired  man  to  undertake  ;  and  this  is  implied,  and  is 
all  that  is  necessarily  implied,  in  the  ordinances  and  formularies 
of  every  church  :  but  to  decide  who  are  or  are  not  partakers  of 
the  benefits  of  the  christian  covenant,  and  to  prescribe  to  one's 
fellow-mortals,  as  the  terms  of  salvation,  the  implicit  adoption  of 
our  own  interpretations,  is  a  most  fearful  presumption  in  men  not 
producing  miraculous  proofs  of  an  immediate  divine  mission." 

There  being,  therefore,  no  foundation  for  this  figment — this 
covering  of  fig-leaves  —  the  naked  deformity  of  this  cruel  doctrine 
must  stand  forth  to  view. 

This  consequence  is  equally  certain,  not  only  as  deduced  from 
this  doctrine  generally,  but  also  as  inferred  from  the  prelatic 
theory  of  schism,  which  follows  from  it.  Schism,  say  they,  is  a 
voluntary  separation  from  the  holy  catholic  church,  which  church 

1)  '  Essays  on  Dangers  to  the  Christian  Failh,'p.  238. 
C 


XVin  INTRODUCTION. 

they  are.  Such  a  separation  is,  according  to  Austin  and  other 
fathers,  and  to  Thomas  Aquinas  and  other  schoohnen,  a  damna- 
ble sin;  and  as  efleciually  excludes  from  the  means  of  salvation, 
as  did  the  shutting  of  the  doors  of  the  ark,  close  upon  all  without 
the  only  way  of  escape  from  the  deluge.  (See  Pet.  20 — 21.)  From 
this,  therefore,  it  follows,  as  theRornanists  plainly  teach,  and  as  the 
premises  necessarily  conclude,  that  all  who  are  guilty  of  schism, 
as  all  non-episcopalians  are,  are  certainly  beyond  the  reach  of  any 
possible  salvation. 

That  this  conclusion  is  the  certain  and  necessary  result  of  this 
doctrine,  Avill  further  appear  from  the  testimony  of  episcopalians 
themselves. 

"  The  doctrine  of  these  high-churchmen,  then,'"  says  Mr. 
Bristed,  after  quoting  two  divines,  "  is,  that  all  non-episcopalians 
are  in  the  broad  road  to  perdition  ;  their  watchword  being  '  epis- 
copacy or  damnation,'  as  if  multitudes  do  not  obtain  both  these 
benefits  ;  and  as  if  such  a  dogma  were  not  of  the  very  essence  of 
popery !  " 

"They,  indeed,  only  follow  in  the  foot-tracks  of  another  rever- 
end gentleman,  who,  some  years  since,  when  preaching  an  ordi- 
nation sermon  at  St.  Paul's  church,  in  the  city  of  New  York,  de- 
clared that  Jill  ministers,  not  episcopally  ordained,  are  impostors  ; 
their  commissions,  forgeries;  and  their  sacraments,  blasphemy." 

That  this  is  the  nece.-sary  conclusion  from  their  principles,  is 
urged,  explicitly,  by  the  London  Christian  Observer.^  "But  the 
declaration,"  says  this  work,  in  allusion  to  the  dicta  of  a  Mr. 
Knollis,  '  that  those  who  are  saved  must  be  saved  through 
Christ,'  "does  not  touch  the  question.  It  was  the  very  point  of  his 
argument,  (let  our  readers  re-peruse  the  extract,)  that  no  dissenter 
can  be  in  covenant  with  God,  or  have  any  title  to  the  promises  of 
salvation.  A  dissenter,  he  urged,  '  is  not  a  member  of  Christ's 
church  ;  and  Christ  has  no  where  said  that  he  will  save  out  of 
his  church;'  assuredly,  then,  a  dissenter,  if  saved,  must  be 
saved  by  unpromised,  uncovenanted  mercy.  Again,  '  Christ 
Tnay  save' a  dissenter  ;  'but  he  does  not  positively  say  he  will,' 
Is  not  this  consigning  all  dissenters  to  uncovenanted  mercy  ?  And 
we  may  add,  that  it  is  presumptuous  not  only  in  the  way  of  bind- 
ing, but  also  of  loosing;  for  if  God  has  not  given  any  promise, 
what  right  has  Mr.  Knollis  to  hold  out  any  possibility,  however 
feeble,  that  a  dissenter  may  be  saved  ?  He  should  say  more  or 
less.  The  error  arises  from  an  unscriptural  and  anti-Anglican 
notion  of  'the  church,'  from  which,  and  the  blessed  promises 
made  to  it,  Mr.  Knollis's  argument  excludes  many  who  will  not 
be  found  excluded  at  the  last  day.  We  believe  that  Christ's 
holy  catholic  church  includes  all  who  love  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  in  sincerity ;  though  they  do  not  all  form  one  visible  com- 
munion upon  earth." 

The  same   interpretation  was  put  upon   the  high-church   doc- 

1)  '  Thoughts,'  &c.  vol.  i.  p.  420.  2)  Nov.  1840,  pp.  703  and  704. 


INTRODUCTION.  XIX 

trines,  by  the  learned  and  able  author  of  '  The  Rights  of  the 
Christian  Church,'  who  was  himself  a  member  of  that  church, 
and  a  professed  defender  of  it,  against  the  non-jurors.  "  But," 
says  he,'  *'  are  the  highflyers,  who  confine  the  church  of  Christ  to 
a  smaller  number,  (than  the  papists,)  and  who  are  so  far  from 
communicating  with  other  reformed  churches,  either  at  home  or 
abroad,  that  they  damn  those  who  do  so,  as  schismatics  and 
hypocrites,  more  charitable  ?" 

But  as  this  is  a  point  of  such  evident  importance,  I  would  in- 
vite attention  to  a  few  quotations  from  prelatical  writers,  in  addi- 
tion to  the  many  that  may  be  found  in  different  parts  of  the  work 
itself. 

"  The  immediate  purpose  of  the  church  is  to  convey  from  God 
to  man,  those  heaven-descending  influences  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
whereby  his  salvation  is  to  be  vvrought.  That  preternatural  op- 
eration, that  subtle  but  powerful  touch,  whereby  the  will  is  reno- 
vated, requires  a  distinct  vehicle,  a  mode  of  conveyance  which 
both  befits  and  witnesses  a  direct  derivation  from  God. "2 

Is  not  this  prelatically-ordained  ministry  laid  down  as  one  of 
the  essential  marks  of  the  church,  and  "  the  means  through 
which  the  divine  presence  is  graciously  represented  in  the 
church  ?"^  "  I  conscientiously  believe  the  church  of  Christ  (that 
is,  in  her  three  orders)  to  be  an  institution  equally  sacred  as  the 
divine  lavvs  themselves."'' 

Hear  Bishop  Ravenscroft,  of  North  Carolina  :^  "  What  presby- 
terian  or  other  dissenter,  will  risk  the  purchase  of  property  from  a 
distant  owner,  by  power  of  attorney,  upon  the  mere  assertion  of 
the  agent,  that  he  is  empowered  to  convey  the  title  ?  Know  you 
of  any,  who  would  not  require  to  see  the  power  of  attorney,  that 
iiwas  in  due  form  ot  law,  and  such  as  would  bind  the  principal, 
before  he  paid  the  price,  or  even  became  bound  for  it?  And 
know  you  not  of  thousands,  who  bargain  for  the  rich  inheritance 
of  the  gospel,  for  themselves  and  their  families,  without  the 
slightest  security,  beyond  the  mere  say-so  of  the  agent  ?  Alas  ! 
how  very  true  are  our  Saviour's  words,  '  that  the  children  of  this 
world  are,  in  their  generation,  wiser  than  the  children  of  light.' 
Episcopalians  present  these  doctrines  to  their  hearers,  in  the  full 
persuasion,  that  the  church,  the  ministry,  and  the  sacraments, 
are  as  distinctly  and  truly  appointments  of  God,  in  order  to  the 
snlcation  of  sinners^  as  the  faith  of  the  gospel ;  and  that  only  as 
th£se  are  united  in  the  profession  of  religion,  can  the  hope  thereby 
given  to  man,  be  worthy  of  the  name  of  assvra^ice.'" 

Savs  Dr.  How,6  "  Of  this  church,  (i.  e.  '  the  true  church,'  as 
instituted   by  Christ  and  his  apostles,)  "  of  this  church,  all  men 

1)  Lonrl.  1707,  ed.  3cl,  p.  364. 

2)  Gladstone's  Church,  in  its  Relations  to  the  Stale. 

3)  The  Old  Paiiis,  by  the  Rev.  J.  B.  Pratl,  3d  ed.  Oxford,  1840,  p.  41. 

4)  Ibid,  pp.  10!)  and  250. 

5)  Vind.  and  Def.  in  Evang.  and  Lit.  Mag.  vol.  ix.  p.  549. 

6)  Vind.  p.  73  5  and  also  p.  81. 


XX  INTRODUCTION. 

are  commanded  to  become  members.  In  refusing'  to  become 
members  of  it,  therefore,  they  violate  the  law  of  God,  So  far 
as  their  conduct  is  to  be  traced  to  unavoidable  ignorance,  or  in- 
voluntary error,  it  will  be  excused  ;  so  far  as  it  is  the  result  of 
pride,  passion,  negligence,  or  any  other  culpable  cause,  it  will  be 
ground  of  condemnation.  God  only  can  tell  when  error  proceeds 
from  a  criminal,  when  from  a  pardonable,  source  :  He  only  can 
tell,  in  each  individual  case,  how  far  the  heart  is  sincere,  and 
how  far  allowance  is  to  be  made  for  the  ignorance,  the  mistakes, 
and  the  prejudices,  of  his  frail  creatures," "  Wilful  oppo- 
sition to  episcopacy  is  certainly  rebellion  against  God,  and  must, 
therefore,  exclude  from  his  presence.'" "  /n  short,  your  op- 
ponents say  that  wilfxd  rejection  of  episcopacy  will  exclude  from 
the  kingdom  of  heaven.^^ 

The  Rev,  Andrew  Fowler,  Rector  in  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
Church,  in  S,  C,  in  his  Catechism,  defines  the  "  church  of  Christ," 
as  that  in  which  "  the  sacraments  are  duly  administered  by 
persons  rightly  ordained,"'  that  is,  by  "  the  bishops  who  were 
commissioned  by  the  apostles,"*  And  he  concludes, ^  "  that,  as 
there  is  but  one  holy,  catholic,  or  universal  church,  for  which 
Christ  died,  we,  who  are  called,  have  no  hope  of  salvation,  but  as 
being  faithful  members  of  it." 

Not  less  explicit  are  the  words  of  the  '  Charleston  Gospel 
Messenger,'  in  a  recent  article  on  "  Schism,"*  Speaking  of  the 
"  very  great  misfortune  "  "  of  those  who  are  dissenters,"  it  is 
said,  "  whatsoever  blessing  God  gives  through  his  regularly  or- 
dained ministry —  whatever  benefit  is  attached  to  their  ministra- 
tion of  the  sacraments  of  baptism  and  the  holy  eucharist  —  what- 
ever advantage  belongs  to  hearing  the  word  preached  by  lawful, 
spiritual  authority  —  all  these  the  dissenter,  (that  is,  every  non-epis- 
copalian in  Charleston  and  elsewhere,)  loses,  whether  it  be  through 
his  sin,  OR  HIS  MISFORTUNE,  Thus,  in  a  remarkable  man- 
ner, the  sin  of  the  parents  cleaves  to  the  children  until  the  third 
and  fourth  generation,"  Again,  "  it  may  be  thought  very  liberal 
to  say  that  separation  from  the  church  is  not  sinful,  (that,  is,  in 
Charleston,  from  St,  Michael's,  St,  Philip's,  or  St.  Paul's,)  when 
scripture  declares  it  to  be  so,  but  I  deny  that  it  is  charitable."  It 
is  then  shown  to  be  charitable  to  unchurch  them  all,  that  they  may 
"  see  their  error,  and  join  themselves  to  the  apostolic  church."^ 

"Firmly  persuaded,  with  Hooker,  that  episcopacy  is  the  primi- 
tive apostolical  institution,  I  must  consider  obedience  to  it  to  be  a 
matter  of  christian  obligation."^ 

Bishop  Hobart,  in  his  '  Companion  to  the  Altar,'  puts  these  words 

1)  Charleston,  1840,  p.  6,  §  ii.  and  p,  13,  §  ix. 

2)  Pages  10,  12,  13. 

3)  On  p.  24. 

4)  For  May,  1841,  see  p.  52. 

5)  P.  50,  51.  The  reader  should  know  that  this  Magazine  professes  to  be  "  rfi- 
dactic"  in  its  character,  and  a  "  lover  of  peace."  Wc  mighl  fill  our  volume  with 
similar  exemplifications  of  its  pacific,  liberal  and  didactic  character. 

6)  Daubeny's  Appendix  to  his  Guide,  quoted  with  approbation,  in  '  A  Collection 
of  the  Essays  on  the  subject  of  Episcopacy,'  N.  York,  1806,  p.  152. 


INTRODUCTION.  XXI 

into  the  mouth  of  a  communicant :  "  Let  it  be,  therefore,  thy  su- 
preme care,  O  my  soul,  to  receive  the  blessed  sacrament  of  the 
body  and  blood  of  the  Saviour,  only  from  the  hands  of  those  who 
derive  their  authority  by  regular  transmission  from  Christ," 
Ag-ain  he  says,  "  where  the  gospel  is  proclaimed,  communion 
with  the  church,  by  the  participation  of  its  ordinances  at  the 
hands  of  the  duly  authorized  priesthood,  is  the  indispensable  con- 
dition of  salvation,''^  except  in  cases  of  "  ignorance,  invincible 
prejudice,  imperfect  reasoning,  and  mistaken  judgment.'" 

Dr.  Hide,  after  laying  down  their  premises  of  no  ministry,  and 
no  worship,  &c.,  goes  on  to  say:  "Here  seems  yet  a  very  bad 
certainty  of  their  religion  ;  and  how  can  there  be  a  better  cer- 
tainty of  their  salvation  ?  unless  (that  we  may  gratify  their  sin- 
gularity more  than  our  veracity)  we  will  say,  there  may  be  a 
company  of  good  christians  out  of  the  communion  of  saints,  or  a 
commonwealth  of  saints,  out  of  Christ's  catholic  church.'"^ 

What  are  we  to  understand  by  the  declaration  of  the  Tracts, 
that  "  episcopal  authority  is  the  very  bond  which  unites  christians 
to  each  other,  and  to  Christ"  — or  of  the  British  Critic,  that  "  the 
effect  of  separating  from  the  bishop  is  a  separating  from  Christ." 
In  Nos.  51  and  52  of  the  Oxford  Tracts  we  have  these  strong 
expressions  :  "  Christ  never  appointed  two  ways  to  heaven  ;  nor 
did  he  build  a  church  to  save  some,  and  make  another  institution 
to  save  other  men.  There  is  no  other  name  given  under  heaven, 
among  men,  whereby  we  may  be  saved,  but  the  name  of  Jesus, 
and  that  is  no  otherwise  given  under  heaven  than  in  the  church. "^ 

From  the  '  New  York  Churchman,'  which  quotes  from  the  Ox- 
ford Tractists,  we  learn  :  "  1.  That  the  only  way  of  salvation  is 
the  partaking  of  the  body  and  blood  of  our  sacrificed  Redeemer. 
2.  That  the  mean  expressly  authorized  by  Him,  for  that  purpose, 
is  the  holy  sacrament  of  His  supper.  3.  That  the  security,  by 
Him  no  less  expressly  authorized,  for  the  continuance  and  due 
application  of  that  sacrament,  is  the  apostolical  commission  of  the 
bishops,  and  under  them  the  presbyters  of  the  church."  "That 
is,  episcopacy  or  perdition."'* 

The  Rev.  William  Jones,  one  of  the  fathers  of  the  English 
church,  quoted  by  the  Oxford  Tractators,  in  their  Catenae,  has 
two  discourses  on  the  same  perverted  and  unmeaning  words,  (i.  e. 
in  their  isolation,)  which  have,  as  if  original,  gained  such  noto- 
riety to  Dr.  Hook.  In  these  he  exposes  "  two  great  errors  "  —  the 
first  supposes  that  the  church  will  save  men  without  godliness  f 
and  the  second,  that  godliness  will  save  men  without  the  church,'"^ 
which  "  is  the  error  of  those  that  leave  the  church  to  follow  some 
private   way   of  worship."      "  We  must,"  he  says,  "  be  of  the 

1)  Ibid,  p.  149. 

2)  See  quoted  in  Baxter's  '  Five  Disc,  on  Ch.  Govt.'  Lend.  1659,  p.  343. 

3)  See  quoted  with  more,  in  Bishop  Meade's  Sermon  for  Bishop  Elliott,  p.  95. 

4)  Tlie  Presbyterian. 

5)  "  Godliness  is  the  sense  and  spirit  of  all  the  forms  and  services  of  the  church." 
Ibid,  p.  411. 

6)  Wks.  vol.  V.  pp.  393,  &c.  411,  &c. 


XXll  INTRODUCTION. 

church  outwardly,  in  order  to  be  of  the  church  inwardly."'  And 
as  baptism  can  only  be  administered  by  them,  so  he  teaches  that 
"  as  the  church  could  never  find  any  where  a  new  birth,  indepen- 
dent of  baptism,  we  never  shall. "2  Of  course,  therefore,  we  are 
excluded  from  its  possible  enjoyment.  Our  condition  and  that  of 
such  as  are  within  the  church,  is  likened  by  him  to  the  waters  of 
the  flood,  and  the  ark  of  Noah  ;''  the  city  of  Sodom  devoted  to 
destruction,  and  Zoar,  the  city  of  refuge ;  Egypt,  the  house  of 
slavery,  and  Canaan,  the  land  of  liberty." 

And  thus  again:'*  "  What  further  danger  is  there  in  schism? 
The  obvious  danger  of  losing  the  benefit  of  God's  ordinances  for 
our  salvation  ;  as  a  limb  severed  from  the  body  loses  the  life  of 
the  body.  Why  so  ?  Because,  if  we  have  no  true  church,  we 
have  no  true  sacraments,  to  which  the  promises  of  life  are  an- 
nexed."* 

The  facts  in  the  case,  then,  are  these.  Prelatists  do  not  under- 
take (for  how  indeed  can  they  ?)  to  deny  the  eminent  piety ,  as  chris- 
tia7is,  of  many  non-episcopalians  —  but  they  do  positively  deny 
that  they  can  possibly  receive  or  enjoy  any  mercy  flowing  through 
the  evangelical  covenant,  while  as  to  their  future  state  and  condi- 
tion, "  they  obstinately  refuse  to  pronounce  any  judgment,"  one 
way  or  the  other."  Now,  surely,  here  is  a  most  extraordinary 
case.  We  have  in  the  premises  "  eminently  pious  christians  "  — 
we  have,  as  propositions,  an  utter  rejection,  as  infamous,  of  the 
tenet  that  none  but  prelatists  can  be  saved  —  and  the  equally  pos- 
itive affirmation,  that  for  all  such  individuals,  covenanted  mercy 
there  is  none  —  and  as  a  conclusion,  a  dogged  silence,  which 
will  give  no  response  to  the  most  earnest  inquiry,  —  what  will  be 
the  future  condition  of  such  rejectors  of  prelacy  ?  ' 

There  is,  on  this  theory,  mercy  for  the  heathen,  vile,  wicked 
and  idolatrous,  though  they  be^  —  and  for  the  Jews,  though  in 
"great  and  lamentable  error"*  —  but  all  who  "wilfully  reject 
episcopacy,"  must  be  forever  excluded  from  the  kingdom  of 
heaven,'"  for  their  "  certain  rebellion  against  God."    We  can  only 

1)  Ibid,  p.  412. 

2)  P.  42.3. 

3)  Ibid,  vol.  xi.  pp.  410,  and  411. 

4)  See  the  first  Collect  in  the  office  for  public  baptism. 

5)  Ibid,  p.  428. 

See  also  similar  quotations  from  tlie  Bishop  of  Exeter's  Second  Triennial 
Char<;;e,  1836,  p.  44;  and  from  Precenlor  Lowe's  Sermon,  in  Mr.  Acton's  Lect.  as 
above.  Mr.  Lowe  says,  of  these  prelatical  successors,  that  Christ  •'  delegated  these 
powers  to  them  alone,  dL.nd  absolutely  excluded  all  others  from  acting  with 
effect  as  ambassadors  and  stewards  of  the  mysteries  of  God."  So  the  Bishop  says, 
"  He  who  wilfully  and  in  despite  of  due  warning',  or  through  recklessness  and  worldly- 
mindedness,  sets  al  naught  its  ordinances,  and  despises  its  ministers,  has  no  right 

TO  PROMISE  TO  HIMSELF  ANY  SHARE  IN  THE  GRACE  WHICH  THEY  ARE  AP- 
POINTED   TO    CONVEY." 

6)  Daubeny's  Guide,  App   p.  259. 

7)  Ibid,  App.  p.  275,  and  Lond.  Chr.  Obs.  1805,  p.  162. 

8)  Dr.  How's  Vind.  p.  106,  el  preced. 

9)  Ibid,  p.  109. 

10)  Ibid,  pp.  81,  73,  &c. 


INTRODUCTION.  XXlll 

say  —  happy  are  the  heathen  —  happy  are  the  Jews — but  of  all 
men,  most  miserable  are  non-episcopalians, —  that  is,  nineteen 
twentieths  of  all  the  reformed  churches  ! 

Section  IV.     The  imperative  Duty  of  controverting  this  Doctrine. 

Inasmuch,  therefore,  as  this  doctrine  so  plainly  and  unequivo- 
cally involves  —  as  has  been  shown  by  the  confession  and  the 
teaching  of  prelatists  themselves  —  the  utter  exclusion  from  all 
hope  and  mercy  of  all  non-episcopalians,  the  duty  of  controverting 
it  is  very  apparent. 

We  concur  fully  with  Dr.  How,  in  the  reasons  he  has  so  ably 
presented  in  his  '  Preliminary  Kemarks"  in  favor  of  the  neces- 
sity and  importance  of  controversy.  Where  important  truths  are 
denied,  or  unimportant  truths  are  held  forth  as  essential  to  the 
faith  of  every  true  christian,  we  are  called  upon  to  controvert. 
Scripture  —  the  tenure  upon  which  we  hold  the  blessing  of  sound 
doctrine  —  the  lessons  taught  us  on  every  page  of  ecclesiastical 
history  —  the  experience  of  the  church  in  this  country  —  the  in- 
trinsic value,  and  the  exposed  and  dangerous  position,  of  truth  — 
all  call  upon  us  to  contend  earnestly  for  the  faith  and  liberty  of  the 
gospel.  "No  body  of  men,"  says  this  writer,  "  will  grow  with- 
out contending  for  their  principles  ;  nor  will  any  attachment  be 
preserved  for  principles,  which  it  is  made  an  object  to  keep  sys- 
tematically out  of  sight.  Under  such  circumstances,  the  laity 
would  soon  become  entirely  ignorant  of  the  peculiar  doctrines  of 
the  church  ;  the  clergy  would,  in  time,  become  ignorant  of  them 
also."  "  They  who  so  decidedly  condemn  all  defence  of  the  prin- 
ciples which  discriminate  our  church  from  other  christian  societies, 
must  be  reduced  to  the  dilemma  of  saying  either  that  the  peculiar 
principles  of  our  church  are  unscriptural,  or  that  the  injunction  of 
the  apostle  is  not  to  be  obeyed."  "  We  are  to  display  the  meek- 
ness and  affectionateness  of  the  christian  temper  in  our  inter- 
course with  our  brethren  of  other  denominations ;  but  we  are  not 
to  sacrifice  our  principles  to  theirs  :  — nay,  ive  are  not  to  he  afraid 
to  contend  firmly  against  what  we  conceive  to  he  error,  even  at  the 
hazard  of  deeply  offending  those  by  whom  it  is  emhraced.  The 
apostles  were  surely  animated  by  the  true  spirit  of  the  gospel. 
They  resisted  error  with  a  firmness  which  nothing  could  shake  ; 
and  propagated  truth  with  an  unwearied  and  inextinguishable 
zeal.  It  is  a  false  charity  that  places  all  opinions  and  all  commun- 
ions upon  a  level  —  a  charity  which  religion,  reason,  and  common 
sense,  equally  disclaim." 

Dr.  How,  indeed,  is  not  ashamed  to  boast  that  "the  church"  — 
we  suppose  he  means  the  prelatical  church  —  "of  Connecticut 
has  grown  up  in  the  midst  of  perpetual  discussion.  She  is  liter- 
ally the  child  of  controversy.""    Again,  "  a  large  proportion  of  the 

1)  Vind  of  the  Prot.  Ep  Ch,  2)  Pages  15,  9A,  27. 


XXIV  INTRODUCTION. 

clergymen  of  our  church  now  settled  in  the  diocess  of  New  York 
are  converts  from  other  denominations.'"  "  Deprive  our  church 
in  this  diocess  of  the  clergymen  who  have  joined  her  from  other 
denominations,  and  she  would  be  left,  indeed,  in  a  very  desolate 
condition.'"' 

How  clearly,  then,  is  it  our  duty,  as  presbyterians,  to  stand  for- 
ward in  defence  of  our  character  and  claims.  "  Matters  have 
come  to  a  fine  pass,  indeed,"  says  Dr.  Rice,  in  his  able  review  of 
Bishop  Ravenscroft,''  "  if,  when  a  presbyterian  maintains  that  he 
is  a  member  of  the  church  of  Christ,  he  is  to  be  represented  as 
thereby  making  an  attack  on  episcopacy !  It  is  often  made  a  sub- 
ject of  private  talk,  '  this  presbyterian  is  not  one  of  us  ;  he  is  an 
alien  from  the  family,  and  has  no  right  to  any  of  its  privileges, 
nor  to  any  part  of  the  inheritance.'  The  presbyterian,  on  hearing 
this,  comes  out  openly,  and  says,  '  We  are  brethren  ;  here  is  the 
proof  of  my  birth,  my  baptism,  my  education  under  the  care  of  a 
common  father;  let  us,  then,  live  in  peace,  and  cherish  brotherly 
love.'  '  See,'  cries  the  other,  '  how  this  man  is  picking  a  quarrel 
with  me,  and  even  attacking  me  without  provocation  !  This  was 
the  only  sort  of  attack  ever  made  by  the  Reviewer,  until  Bishop 
R.  preached  and  published  his  famous  sermons."'* 

This  necessity  for  discussion  is  also  apparent  from  the  prevailing 
ignorance  upon  the  subject  Dr.  Rice,  in  introducing  some  consid- 
erations on  this  point,  remarks :  "  In  our  southern  country,  sub- 
jects of  this  kind  have  been  so  little  discussed,  that  the  great  body 
of  the  people  have  no  ideas  of  their  true  bearing,  or  of  the  manner 
in  which  they  affect  their  true  interests."*  Bishop  Ravenscroft, 
adopting  the  sentiment,  presents  it  as  a  reason  why  he  "  should 
stand  justified  for  discarding  that  false  tenderness  to  the  feelings 
of  others,  which  had  been  instrumental  in  keeping  back  these  fun- 
damental doctrines  from  the  edification  of  the  pulpit."^ 

One  design  of  the  Hon.  Judge  Dudley,  in  establishing  his  Lec- 
ture at  Harvard  College  about  a  century  ago,  —  as  Dr.  Chauncy 
informs  us,  in  his  lecture  on  '  The  Validity  of  Presbyterian  Ordi- 
nation Asserted  and  Maintained  "  —  was,  "  that  our  sons  who  are 
sent  here,  from  all  parts  of  the  land,  to  be  trained  up  for  public 
service,  might  be  under  advantage  to  hear  and  know  the  reasons, 
upon  which  they  may  with  all  good  conscience  join  in  communion 
with  these  churches,  and  officiate  as  pastors  in  them,  should 
they,  when  fitted  for  it,  be  called  thereto."  "  It  took  rise  in  the 
honorable   founder's  mind,   from  the  narrow  principles  of  those 

1)  Vinci,  p.  17. 

2)  Ibid,  p.  19. 

3)  P.  20. 

4)  Evangelical  and  Literary  Magazine,  p.  634. 
6)  Evang.  and  Rel.  Mag.  vol.  ix.  p.  4o8- 

6)  '■  Wen  should  never  be  considered  as  guilty  of  attack  upon  their  fellow-chris- 
tians,  simply  for  bearing  testimony  against  what  they  conceive  to  be  pernicious  error." 
(Dr.  How's  Vind.  p.  145.)  "  If  ^ou  think  our  church  corrupt,  you  have  a  right  to 
say  so.  Without  a  privilege  of  this  kind,  free  discussion  would  be  impossible." 
(Ibid,  p.  142.) 

7)  Boston,  1762,  p.  63  in  Atheuseum,  b.  li.  p.  118. 


INTRODUCTION.  XXV 

anathematizing'  zealots,  who  would  confine  salvation  to  their  own 
church,  by  confining  the  validity  of  gospel  ordinances  to  the  ad- 
ministration of  them,  by  persons  upon  whom  the  hands  of  a  bishop, 
in  their  sense  of  the  word,  have  been  imposed." 

"  I  therefore  earnestly  wish,"  says  the  Rev.  William  Jame- 
son, in  his '  Sum  of  the  Episcopal  Controversy, '^  "  that  the  pastors 
of  the  Kirk  of  Scotland  would  spend  more  time  in  explaining 
this  controversy,  especially  in  their  catechetical  discourses,  and 
confirm  from  scripture  the  presbyterian  principles,  and  confute 
their  adversaries.  This,  I  earnestly  wish  were  done  in  a  grave 
way  and  clear  style,  for  it  certainly  would  be  of  great  use,  espec- 
ially to  the  common  people.  It  would  also  be  of  great  use  to  give 
from  the  pulpit,  now  and  then,  calmly  and  plainly,  a  deduction  of 
God's  mercies  unto  this  land  by  delivering  us  from  spiritual  Baby- 
lon, Rome  ;  and  again,  from  the  false  doctrine  and  tyranny  of  her 
kinsmen,  the  prelates."  "  Some  may  say,  the  question  is  of  no 
great  moment  —  I  afllrm  the  contrary,  were  it  but  on  this  account 
only,  that  all  the  bloodshed,  rapine,  confiscation,  banishment,  im- 
prisonment, fining  and  confining,  that  miserable  Scotland  has  been 
harassed  with  above  a  hundred  years,  were  occasioned  by  this 
controversy."  But  on  this  subject  we  refer  our  readers  to  our 
first  Lecture,  where  it  is  fully  considered. 

Should  it  be  thought  that  our  language  is,  in  many  cases,  too 
strong,  let  it  be  borne  in  mind,  that  most  frequently  we  have  used 
the  language  of  our  opponents  themselves;  and  that  blame  is, 
therefore,  imputable  to  them  and  not  to  us,  where  it  may  be 
justly  merited.^  Let  it  also  be  remembered,  that  in  all  cases,  we 
speak  only  "  of  the  tendency  of  the  doctrine,  and  not  the  actual 
/eeZm^  of  any  particular  persons,'"  —  and  that  the  further  we  may 
be  from  questioning  any  individual's  devotion  and  reverence,  the 
more  necessary  is  it  that  we  should  be  on  our  guard  against  their 
erroneous  principles ;  since  their  acceptance  by  such  persons  is  an 
alarming  symptom,  and  a  proof  of  their  very  probable  diff'usion.'* 

Section  V.     What  we  Challenge  and  Assert. 

First  —  The  production  of  any  one  scriptural  record,  of  any  one 
ordination,  where  only  a  single  individual  ofiiciated. 

Secondly — The  production  of  one  single  case,  where  any  indi- 
vidual was  ordained  a  second  or  third  time,  and  where  there  is 
thus  afforded  even  a  pretext  for  the  three  ordinations  of  prelacy. 

Thirdly  —  The  production  of  any  proof  for  the  necessary  em- 
ployment, in  ordination,  as  essential  to  a  valid  ministry,  of  impo- 

1)  Glasgow,  1713,  Preface. 

2)  Thus  speaks  Dr.  Cook,  (Wks.  on  Episcop.  vol.  ii.  p.  200  .)  "If  there  is  any 
thing  offensive  to  any  one,  in  the  book,  it  is  a  quotation  ;  and  quolations  a  man  is 
bound  to  state  as  they  are  staled  bv  the  author  from  whom  they  are  taken." 

3)  Keble  on  Primit.  Trad.  p.lOG. 

4)  Ibid;  and  also  Saravia's  Priesthood,  p.  29. 


XXVI  INTRODUCTION. 

sition  of  hands,  —  if  the  cases  of  Paul  and  Timothy  are  not 
allowed  to  be  cases  of  ordination,  and  therefore  proofs  of  presby- 
terian,  in  direct  opposition  to  prelatic,  ordinations. 

Fourthly  —  The  exhibition  of  any  authority  whereby  prelates 
usurp  the  title  of  bishop ;  a  title  which  was  given  by  the  Holy 
Ghost  to  presbyters,  and  which  is  given  to  no  other  ofKcers  in  the 
New  Testament. 

Fifthly  —  we  challenge  those  who  assert  the  necessity  of  prelates, 
priests  and  deacons,  as  three  distinct  orders  of  the  christian  minis- 
try, and  essential  to  the  being  of  the  church,  to  prove  that  these 
orders  were  originally  given,  and  do  belong  to  the  catholic  church, 
as  such ;  and  not  to  particular  churches  ;  so  as  that  separation 
from  them  comes  to  be  separation  from  the  church  catholic' 

Sixthly  —  Supposing  that  there  were  persons  called  bishops  or 
apostles,  from  the  very  beginning  ;  or  even  diocesan  bishops  ;  still 
we  challenge  some  proof  of  a  triple  consecration,  and  of  the  pos- 
session of  a  right  to  ordination  in  the  order  of  prelates  exclusive 
of  presbyters.  Let  some  instance  in  the  first  two  centuries  be  pro- 
duced, or  let  these  prelatic  assumptions  be  forever  abandoned. 

Seventhly  —  Further,  we  ask  prelatists  to  show,  from  any  rec- 
ord of  the  church,  for  two  hundred  and  tifty  years,  any  trace 
whatever  of  a  second  ordination,  which  yet  we  might  expect  to  be 
most  frequently  alluded  to,  on  the  supposition  of  the  existence  of 
three  orders  with  their  three  separate  ordinations.^ 

Eighthly  —  We  challenge  the  production  of  a  case  in  the 
earliest  ages,  where  any  ordinary  minister  held  the  oversight 
of  more  than  one  particular  charge  ;  having,  as  his  specific 
duty,  the  oversight  of  ministers  and  churches,  and  not  the  pasto- 
ral care  of  some  particular  congregation. 

What  is  Asserted. 

First  —  Mr.  Noyes,  in  his  '  Claims  of  Episcopacy  Examined,'' 
gives  it  as  the  result  of  his  examination,  1.  That  "  it  cannot  be 
shown  that  the  order  of  diocesan  bishops  existed  during  the  first 
two  centuries  of  the  christian  era.  If,  during  that  period,  bishops 
are  mentioned,  it  is  in  such  a  connexion  as  to  show  that  they 
were  only  overseers  of  single  churches,  or  moderators  amongst 
presbyters  equal  to  themselves  in  authority,  having  no  connexion 
with  more  than  one  church,  and  no  exclusive  right  to  ordain  chris- 
tian ministers.  2.  It  can  be  shown  that  diocesan  episcopacy  had 
human  origin,  and  a  gradual  progress.  It  can  be  shown  that  it 
naturally  arose  from  the  circumstances  of  the  early   churches, 

1)  The  Ta7*g;^!«a  of  ihe  Nicene  Synod,  says  Dr.  Owen,  (Works,  vol.  xix. 
p.  173,)  intends  no  more  than  the  old  usage,  nor  is  any  thing  of  institution,  nor  so 
much  as  of  apostolical  tradition,  pleaded  therein. 

2)  See  Dr.  Rice  in  Evang.  and  Lit.  Mag.  vol.  ix.  p.  617.  "  But  to  put  the  mat- 
ter beyond  controversy,  we  will  undertake  to  show,  that  there  was  no  ordination  per- 
formed in  the  church  at  all,  from  the  days  of  the  apostles,  until  at  least  two  hundred 
and  filty  years  after  Christ,  by  any  but  presbyters."     (pp.  618  and  629.) 

3)  Dudleian  Lect.  for  1838,  in  Christ.  Examiner,  for  Nov.  1838,  p.  212. 


INTRODTTCTION.  XXVll 

from  certain  tendencies  in  human  nature,  on  the  part  of  ministers 
and  people,  and  from  the  influence  of  Jewish  and  heathen  insti- 
tutions." "  From  prime-presbyters  arose  city-bishops ;  from  city- 
bishops,  diocesan  ones  ;  from  diocesan  bishops,  metropolitans  ; 
from  metropolitans,  patriarchs  ;  and,  finally,  at  the  top  of  all,  his 
holiness  the  pope,  claiming  the  character  of  universal  head  of 
the  church.'" 

Secondly  —  "The  testimony  of  early  writers,"  says  the  author 
of  the  '  Sketch  of  the  History  of  Presbyterianism  in  England,'* 
"  shows  that  presbyterian  order,  as  then  followed,  was  derived 
from  scripture,  and  is  a  confirmation  of  its  statements-  The  name 
ot  bishop  or  overseer  was  given  to  all  presbyters  or  elders  till  the 
year  106  ;  and  down  to  the  beginning  of  the  third  century,  bish- 
ops were  at  least  parochial  or  congregational ;  —  that  is,  the  pas- 
tor, administering  the  word  and  sacraments  in  each  congregation, 
was  styled  bishop,  which  was  the  first  stage  in  the  change  of  the 
use  of  the  word,  applied  originally  to  both  classes  of  elders, — 
those  who  only  rule,  and  those  who  both  rule  and  teach.  After- 
wards it  was  appropriated  to  one  in  each  presbytery  ;  and  thus 
prelacy  was  gradually  introduced,  by  men,  who,  like  '  Diotre- 
phes,  loved  to  have  the  pre-eminence.'  " 

Thirdly  —  For  the  laying  on  of  the  hands  of  the  presbytery,  we 
have  most  express  scripture;  whereas,  on  the  other  hand,  for 
the  laying  on  of  the  hands  of  the  diocesan  bishop,  we  have  no 
express  scripture.^     (1  Tim.  iv.  14.) 

Fourthly  —  No  instance  is  to  be  met  with  of  an  ordination  by  a 
person  under  the  name  of  a  bishop,  in  scripture  ;  neither  have  I 
been  able  to  find  an  instance  of  ordination  under  the  like  name, 
and  meaning  by  it  a  bishop,  as  distinct  from  a  presbyter,  in  any 
writer,  till  we  come  to  the  times  when  it  is  owned  a  distinction 
obtained  between  these  officers  of  the  church.'* 

Fifthly  —  Nor  is  that  mode  of  diction,  bishops,  presbyters,  and 
deacons,  to  be  met  with,  in  any  writer,  before  Clement  of  Alexan- 
dria, who  did  not  flourish  until  the  latter  end  of  the  second  cen- 
tury, unless  we  except  Ignatius,  in  whose  corrupted  and  interpo- 
lated epistles  this  manner  of  speaking  is  common.^ 

Sixthly — There  werer  was  any  general  council  —  never  any 
number  of  accredited  fathers  ;  never  any  modern  church,  since 
the  time  of  our  Lord  and  Saviour,  who  maintained  that  bishops 
were,  hy  divine  right,  an  order  superior  to,  and  distinct  from,  and 
possessing  powers  and  authority  incompatible  with,  presbyters,  as 
presbyters.      He  that  affirms  there  was,  let  him  prove  it.® 

In  conclusion,  we  have  only  to  say,  that  we  have  not  been  led 

1)  Chauncy's  Dudleian  Lecture.     See  also  his  Views  of  Episcopacy ;  Geiseler's 
Ecclesiastical  History,  §  xxix.  lii.  liii.;  Christian  Examiner  for  Nov.  1834,  p.  180,  &.C. 

2)  Pp.  33,  39,  and  40. 

3)  See  Jameson's  Sum  of  the  Episcopal  Controversy,  p.  9. 

4)  Dr.  Chauncy's  Dudleian  Lect.  17G2,  p.  70. 

6)  Dr.  Chauncy's  Appeal  to  the  Public  Answered,  Boston,  1768. 
6)  Powell  on  Ap.  Succ.  ed.  2d,  p.  78. 


XXVIU  INTRODUCTION. 

to  this  discussion  through  any  desire  of  controversy,  or  any  per- 
sonal or  denominational  animosity.  Our  object  is  not  the  exclusive 
aggrandizement  of  any  one  church,  but  the  assertion  of  the  equal 
rights  of  all  who  hold  the  truth  in  sincerity.  We  speak  in  the 
language  of  Christianity,  and  not  of  a  sect  or  party.  We  defend 
protestantism  against  popery  —  apostolical,  against  ancient  Chris- 
tianity—  spiritual  freedom,  against  the  assaults  of  hierarchical 
despotism.  That  the  principles  we  condemn  are  attributable,  not 
to  the  episcopal  church,  but  to  a  party  in  that  church,  we  have 
affirmed,  and  until  we  are  otherwise  convinced,  it  is  against  the 
principles  of  that  party,  we  are  at  war. 

Neither  do  we  desire  to  be  led  into  controversy.  We  have 
given  our  views  candidly,  and  our  authorities  explicitly.  Let  the 
reader  examine  for  himself,  and  weigh  the  evidence  advanced, 
seriously  and  impartially.  Meantime,  should  any  one  feel  inclin- 
ed to  notice  this  argument,  we  would  remind  him,  in  the  language 
of  the  London  Christian  Observer,  in  a  late  review  of  the  work 
of  Bishop  Mcllvaine,'  "that  no  question  is  satisfied,  unless  it  is 
presented  in  particular  detail,  and  in  its  broad  principles  and  gen- 
eral relations.  No  writer  is  fully  answered,  unless  you  not  only 
disprove  his  stated  arguments,  but  his  very  thoughts." 

Should  any  of  the  author's  facts  or  references  be  found  incor- 
rect, he  would  say  that  such  incorrectness  has  arisen  not  from  any 
intention  to  mislead.  And  if  any  such  mistakes  are  pointed  out, 
it  will  give  him  pleasure,  should  he  have  the  opportunity,  to  cor- 
rect them.  In  the  mean  time,  he  is  willing  they  should  be 
withdrawn,  and  the  argument  adjudged  by  the  strength  of  the 
remaining  evidence. 

1)  March,  1841,  p.  167. 

Charleston,  S.  C.  July,  1S41. 


ADDITIONAL  NOTE  TO  INTRODUCTION. 


NOTE  A. 

ORIGIN   OF    THE    OXFORD    TRACTS   AND    THE    OXFORD    DIVINITY. 

The  best  account  of  the  on'n^in  of  the  present  Oxford  party,  who,  with  such  learn- 
ing and  diligence,  have  re-puliiished  and  propagated  these  sentiments,  is  given  by 
Mr.  Beverly,  in  his  recent  work  on  the  '  Heresy  of  Human  Priesthood,'  (Lond.  1839, 
ed.  2d,  pp."72.  73,  74:) 

"  To  Dr.  Pusey,  the  regius  professor  of  Hebrew  in  the  University  of  Oxford,  is 
generally  attributed  the  origination  of  that  sect  or  part}',  which  is  now  called  after  his 
name  ;  but  if  honor  were  given  to  whom  honor  is  due,  the  more  appropriate  name  of 
the  sect  would  be  Hamites,*  from  Dr.  Hook,  the  teacher  to  whom  even  Dr.  Pusey  has 
attributed  his  knowledge  of  those  precious  truths,  which  characterize  the  Oxford 
Tracts. 

"  Dr.  Pusey  returned  from  the  continent,  in  the  year  1828,  and  then  published  an 
apologetic  inquiry  into  the  charge  brought  against  the  theologians  of  Germany,  by 
Mr.  Rose,  the  christian  advocate,  of  Cambridge.  Mr.  Rose,  the  late  principal  of 
King's  College,  London,  was  certainly  deeply  imbued  with  those  opinions,  wliich  are 
now  known  by  the  name  of  Puseyism,  as  early  as  the  year  1324;  for,  at  that  time,  I 
conversed  with  him  on  these  questions,  at  Cambridge  ;  and  such  were  the  sentiments 
which  1  used  to  hear  him  express,  that  they  led  me  to  suppose  he  was  aiming  at  the 
revival  of  the  Laudean  school,  which  seemed,  in  those  days,  to  exist  only  in  history. 
Puseyism  had  not  yet  been  mentioned  ;  and  tiie  Laudean  views,  now  in  a  fair  way  to 
influence  the  whole  body  of  the  clergy,  were  not  openly  entertained  by  any  writer  in 
the  church,  as  far  as  i  am  acquainted  with  clerical  proceedings. 

"  Dr.  Pusey's  opinions  are  supposed  to  have  been  not  unfavorable  to  rationalism, 
when  he  took  up  the  pen  in  defence  of  the  German  theology ;  and  on  that  ground, 
most  probably,  the  Ediiibursh  Rmew  defended  Pcise}',  most  warmly,  versus  Rose. 
An  entire  change,  however,  must  subsequently  have  taki'n  place  in  the  sentiments  of 
this  gentleman,  who,  together  with  his  coadjutor,  Mr.  Newman, t  and  all  (he  leading 
traciators  of  Oxford,  came  to  consider  Mr.  Rose  a  sort  of  patriarch  in  their  cause. 

"  In  the  year  1830,  the  Rev.  J.  H.  Newman,  and  the  Rev.  R.  H.  Froude,  fellows  of 
Oriel  College,  Oxford,  disagreed  with  the  p  ovost  of  their  college  and  soirie  of  the 
tuors.  on  the  subject  of  their  exercising  another  prerogative,  besides  the  usual  offices 
of  tuition  and  literary  superintendence  ;  and  upon  the  provost's  refusing  to  allow  iheir 
claims,  resigned  the  offices  they  held  as  college  tutors.  What  Mr.  Newman's  opinions 
may  have  been,  at  that  time,  I  know  not  ;  but  in  the  year  1828,  Mr.  Froude.  the  now 
all-but-canonized  saint  of  the  party,  thus  wrote  of  Mr.  Newman,  in   a  letter  to  a 

friend  :  '  Sept.  7,  1828  ;  I  heaid  from  N.  the  other  day,  with  the  testimonials 

He  is  a  fellow  that  I  like  more  and  more,  the  more  1  think  of  him  ;  only  I  would  give 
a  few  odd  pence  if  he  wprv:  uol  a  heretic ; '  a  heretic,  in  Mr.  Froude's  phraseology, 
means  a  proiestant,  and  N.  is  an  abbreviation  for  Newman  ;  at  that  time,  therefore, 
'the  Vicar  of  Saint  Mary  the  Virgin  '  was  not  indoctrinated  in  the  theology  of  the 
Oxford  Tracts  ;  indeed  his  opinions  were  bordering  on  low-church  views. 

"  About  midsummer  of  18.33,  the  party  began  publishing  THE  OXFORD 
TRACTS,  having  first  organized  themselves  in  a  regular  association,  as  is  apparent 

*  From  hamust  a  hook. 

t  Mr.  X.*wman  ti.os  l.*lely  pu1)lished  a  volume  of  Sermons,  willi  tlie  followinsr  dpilication  :  *'  To  the  I^ev.  HtiErti  James 
Rose,  Principal  of  Kinj's  College,  London,  and  domestic  chaplain  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  who,  when  hearts 
were  tailing,  bade  U3  stir  up  Ihe  gift  th.at  was  in  U8,  and  betake  ourselves  to  our  true  mother,  this  volume  is  inscribed  by 
his  obliged  and  faithful  friend,  the  author." 


XXX  NOTES    TO    INTRODUCTION. 

by  a  sentence  in  Mr.  Froude's  '  Remains  :'   '  Sept.  16,  1833 has  sent  me 

j'our  resolutions  for  our  association,  which  I  Ihinii  excellent ;'  and  it  is  to  the  opera- 
lions  of  this  association,  that  we  must  now  for  a  few  moments  turn  our  attention. 

"  The  system  of  the  party  seems  to  be  this;  to  take  advantage  of  the  obviously 
incomplete  and  unfinished  state  of  the  Church  of  England ;  and  knowing  well  that  it 
is  a  mixed  system,  which,  in  the  act  of  emerging  from  popery,  was  suddenly  arrested 
by  the  death  ol  Edward  VI.,  to  collect  carel'ully  all  that  it  has  of  its  ancient  popish 
form,  and  to  reject,  as  far  as  may  be,  without  absolute  infraction  of  ecclesiastical  law, 
every  thing  that  savors  of  its  protestant  regeneration.  The  Church  of  England  is 
indeed  an  image  of  iron  and  clay,  a  fal)ric  of  ill-assorted  and  incongruous  materials  ; 
but  such  as  it  is,  Elizabeth,  who  came  to  the  throne  as  a  heroine  of  the  protestant 
cause,  after  the  Marian  persecution,  would  not  allow  any  change  to  take  place  in  this 
her  brother's  unfinished  plan  ;  and  indeed  it  seems  certain,  that  she  wished  rather  to 
recede  to  some  more  papal  form  of  religion,  till  she  was  stimulated  by  the  unceasing 
intrigues  and  treasons  of  the  papists,  to  appear,  to  the  world  at  least,  a  protectress  of 
the  protestant  religion.  The  discrepancies  and  contradictions  of  sentiment  in  the 
authorized  standards  of  the  Anglican  faith,  have  been  frequently  exposed  ;  the  prayer- 
book,  the  homilies,  the  articles  and  the  canons,  are  a  quarry  from  which  a  Laudean,  a 
Puritan,  a  Calvinist,  and  an  Arminian,  may  each  hew  out  his  own  religion,  and  plausi- 
bly argue  that  his  is  the  orthodox  selection:  but  besides  this,  the  very  omissions  of  the 
established  church,  the  many  questions  which  it  has  left  open  and  undecided,  allow  a 
Laudean  to  argue,  that  if  the  established  church,  which  was  onc:^  avowedly  popish, 
has  not,  in  emerging  from  popery,  denounced  or  rejected  such  or  such  ''  usages,'  it  is 
fair  to  suppose  that  she  does  not  oppose  their  retention  ;  and.  therefore,  it  is  right  and 
proper  to  revive  any  'ancient  usage'  not  ahsolu'ely  prohibited.  Amongst  these 
omissions,  for  sake  of  example,  I  mention  '  prayers  for  the  dead,'  which,  it  is  now  de- 
cided in  the  courts  of  law,  the  Church  of  England  does  not  forbid ;  and  if  she  does 
not  forbid,  then  the  next  step  is  to  revive  the  custom )  and  so  of  divers  other 
'  usages.'  " 

''  In  the  reign  of  Charles  I.,  Archbishop  Laud,  with  rapid  strides,  took  the  Church 
of  England  into  Puseyism,  or  popery  faintly  concealed  ;  the  executioner's  axe  stopped 
his  project,  which  revived  again,  however,  in  the  reign  of  Queen  Anne,  but  was  foiled 
with  a  great  overthrow  by  the  revolution  of  1688.  It  was  the  evident  policy  of  the 
Brunswick  dynasty,  to  discourasfe  the  high-church  parly,  and  to  promote  clergymen, 
with  oppo-iile  views,  to  the  bench  ;  hence,  the  two  first  Georffes  steadily  repressed  the 
old  Lnudean  school.  Puseyism  was  consequently  to  be  found  chiefly,  if  not  altogether, 
amongst  the  non-juring  clergy,  the  Jacobites,  and  all  the  other  pious  maleconteiits  of 
that  sera.  Bishop  Ken,*  and  Hicks,  and  Collier,  and  others  of  that  grade,  kept  up 
the  consecrated  flame  of  Puseyism  and  '  privy  conspiracy,'  till  the  flame  seemed  to 
die  out  altogether  wiih  the  death  of  the  non-jurors.  During  the  reign  of  George  III., 
and  his  successor,  the  clergy  seemed  perfectly  contented  with  their  secular  emolu- 
ments, and  were  little  disposed  to  trouble  themselves  wiih  an}-  questions  of  an  exciting 
nature:  Reiio^ious  feelins;,  for  sixty  years  at  least,  was  not  171  action;  and  therefore, 
they  were  neither  Puritans  nor  Papists,  neither  evangelical  nor  Puseyistie,  but  simply 
consumers  of  tithes,  or,  if  need  be,  persecutors  of  methodism,  when  methodism  arose 
to  disturb  their  golden  slumbers.  At  last,  however,  the  old  Laudean  fever  has  revived, 
and  has  spread  its  contagion  through  a'!  ranks  of  the  clergy;  a  swarm  of  unknown 
an'l  inferior  priests  may  now  justify  the  adoption  of  Puseyistie  opinions,  by  reference 
to  the  prelates  of  Oxford  and  Lincoln,  and,  it  is  believed,  to  the  Archbishop  of  Can- 
terbury also. 

"  But  now  to  the  Oxford  Tracts.  The  managers  of  the  association  '  seem  to  have 
laid  down  three  principles  in  the  course  ihny  are  pursuing.  1.  To  restore  every  thing 
practiseil  or  believed  in  the  papal  communion,  not  expressly  forbidden  and  plainly 
priihibited  by  some  decision  o<'  the  established  church  :  this  they  call,  '  inquiring  alter 
ancient  usages  of  the  holy  catholic  church,'  '  cherishing  a  transmissive  religion.'  and 
'  listening  to  the  venerable  voice  of  the  fathers,  councils,'  &c.  2.  To  enjoin  silence 
on  all  the  protestant  tenets  of  the  church,  such  as  the  atonement,  justification  by  faith. 
3.  To  make  a  liberal  use  of  phrases  expressive  of  their  abhorrence  of  poperv  ;  which, 
however,  has  not  succeeded  in  deceiving  the  Roman  catholics,  who  perfectly  under- 
stand this  politic  language  of  their  best  friends  and  most  useful  allies." 

The  true  character  of  the  leader  of  this  heresy  may  be  learned  from  the  following 
notice,  which  we  copy  from  the  London  Record  : 

"  Some  surprise  has  been  expressed  by  the  Times  newspaper,  that  Dr.  Pusey  was 

•  Ki>n,  Kfttlewell,  Hicks,  Collier,  arc  now  lavorite  saints  of  the  Oxford  school.  It  iB  rumored,  that,  by  some  soleraa 
process,  ihcy  have  canoniwd  Bishop  Ken,  more  Romano,  so  that  now  he  is  Saint  Ken. 

The  extent  to  which  the  non-juring  altachtnenLs  of  the  Oxford  party  arc  carri-^d,  is  strikingly  displayed  by  Dr.  Pusey's 
sermon  on  the  5th  of  November.  The  reverend  ifenUeman  aeema  anxious  to  revive,  if  possihle,  the  Jacobioite  agitation  ; 
so  great  is  his  love  for  the  Stewart.B  and  the  non-juror£. 


NOTES    TO    INTRODUCTION.  XXXI 

not  present  at  the  meeting  held  at  the  late  IMr.  Rose's  house,  in  the  summer  of  1833, 
at  wlii  h,  according-  to  Mr.  Arthur  Perceval,  the  Oxford  Tract  'conspiracy'  was 
hatched.  We  believe  the  explanation  is  to  be  found  in  the  coolness  which  then 
subsisted  between  Mr.  Rose  and  Dr.  Pusey,  arisinj^  out  of  their  controversy  about 
German  Neology.  Mr.  Rose  had  exposed  the  awful  state  of  the  German  universities 
and  churciies.  Dr.  Pusey  had  defended  them,  and  questioned  Mr.  Rose's  facts  and 
conclusions.  Dr.  Pusey,  also,  then  avowed  his  low  notions  of  the  value  of  the  Bible, 
by  declaring,  that  it  was  too  much  to  contend  for  the  divine  authority  of  the  historical 
books.  Thus  it  appears,  that  a  denial  of  the  inspiration  of  scripture  was  one  of  Dr. 
Pusey's  first  steps  towards  that  heresy  of  which  he  has  become  a  leader.  Denying  that 
'  all  scripture  is  given  by  inspiration  of  God,'  and  consequently  being  led  to  under- 
value the  authority  of  the  whole  of  the  book  of  God,  he  was  naturally  led  to  look  for 
some  other  court  of  ultimate  appeal  in  matters  of  religion.  Having  rejected  the  Bible, 
he  resorted  to  antiquity  and  tradition.  It  was  but  very  lalcl}',  as  we  are  informed,  that 
Mr.  Dodsworlh  preached,  that  to  give  the  Bible  to  a  poor  man  without  having  Jirst 
given  him  the  Prayer-Book,  was  little  better  than  an  insult." 


Note. — As  proof  that  this  doctrine  excludes  others  from  salvation,  the  Author 
would  add  the  following,  which  he  has  just  met  with. 

Bishop  Jebb  teaches,  that  "  the  Sacred  Scriptures,  taken  by  themselves,  are  not 

THE  WHOLE  OF  REVEALED  RELIGION,"    and    that    "  AN  HIERARCHICAL  CHURCH, 

DAYS  OF  COMMEMORATIVE  OBSERVANCE.  &c.  are  all  ESSENTIAL  COMPO- 
NENTS of  the  great  body  of  the  christian  revelation."  See  Life,  vol.  ii. 
p.  340,  Eng.  ed.  He  also  deprecates  on  behalf  of  a  large  portion  of  his  church  the 
universal  dissemination  of  the  Scriptures,  and  is  sustained  in  doing  so  by  Mr.  31iller — 
(see  Miller's  Bampton  Lectures,  Third  ed.  1838,  p.  10,  14,  &c.) — who  speaks  of  the 
"  quicksands  !  of  dissent."  p.  21. 

The  Author  would,  in  conclusion,  commend  to  his  readers  the  perusal  of  two  small 
and  very  interesting  volumes,  recently  issued  by  the  Board  of  Publication  of  the 
Presbyterian  church,  '  The  History  of  the  Covenanters,'  where  the3'  will  find  a  prac- 
tical commentary  taken  from  the  facts  of  history,  upon  the  spirit  and  bearing  of  this 
prelatic  theory. 


LECTURE    I. 


THE     NECESSITY    FOR     AN    EXAMINATION    INTO     THE    PEELATICAL    DOC- 
TRINE   OF    APOSTOLICAL    SUCCESSION. 

When  the  prophet  Jeremiah  was  commissioned,  by  Jehovah, 
to  stand  in  the  gate  of  the  Lord's  house,  and  there  call  upon  all 
who  entered  in  to  worship  the  Lord,  to  amend  their  ways  and 
their  doings,  he  was  especially  enjoined,  to  admonish  them 
not  to  trust  in  lying  words.'  And  what  were  those  "  lying 
words,"  in  which  they  were  not  to  trust  ?  The  people  had  been 
led,  by  their  false  teachers,  to  believe,  that  because  the  temple, 
W'ith  all  its  services,  its  ritual,  its  forms  and  ceremonies,  and 
its  gorgeous  rites,  were  theirs ;  and  because  these  had  been 
originally  ordained  by  the  express  appointment  of  God  ;  they 
were,  therefore,  so  unalterably  the  favorites  of  heaven,  as  to  be 
assured  of  God's  presence  and  favor,  however  perverse  and  dis- 
obedient they  might  be.  Thus  were  they  deluded  with  the  cry, 
"The  temple  of  the  Lord,  the  temple  of  the  Lord,  the  temple 
of  the  Lord, are  these;"  not  remembering  that  He,  who  ordain- 
ed the  temple,  was  a  holy  God — that  the  temple  itself  was  a 
holy  place — that  the  end,  for  which  it,  and  all  its  services,  were 
instituted,  was  to  promote  the  holiness  of  its  worshippers  ;  and 
that,  therefore,  the  further  removed  they  were  from  holiness  of 
heart  and  life,  the  greater  was  that  condemnation  in  which  they 
were  involved  by  these  distinguishing  privileges. 

And  yet,  as  the  same  principles  of  human  nature  still  remain, 
these  ancient  Israelites  have  found  imitators  in  every  age  and 
country.  So  that  there  are,  and  ever  have  been,  those  who 
cling  the  more  tenaciously  to  the   form   of  godliness,  by   how 

1)  Jer.  vii.  1 — 4. 
1 


2  TENDENCY    TO    TRUST    IN    FORMS.  [lECT.  I. 

much  the  more  they  are  strangers  to  its  power;  and  who  are  there- 
fore "  haughty,  because  of  the  holy  mountains,'"  just  because 
they  have  no  other  holiness  in  which  to  trust.  Forms  and  cere- 
monies man  loveth,  and  can,  by  his  natural  powers,  appreciate 
and  enjoy.  These,  too,  nourish  and  sustain  the  righteousness 
of  the  self-approving  heart;  while  "the  righteousness  of  God, 
which  is  by  faith  in  Christ  Jesus,"  as  it  excludes  all  boasting, 
has  ever  been  a  stone  of  stumbling,  and  a  rock  of  offence. 

Hence  do  we  find  multitudes,  even  now,  not  only  within  the 
pale  of  the  Romish  church,  but  also  within  the  limits  of  the 
prelacy 5*^  and  even  elsewhere,  who  look  round  upon  their  fellow 
christians,  as  aliens  from  the  commonwealth  of  Israel,  and 
strangers  from  the  covenants  of  promise — as  lying  beyond  the 
precincts  of  the  holy  city,  in  the  open  field  of  uncovenanted 
mercy,  in  all  the  shame  of  their  natural  pollution,  unwashed 
and  unsanctified — and  as  thus  debarred  from  all  rightful  partici- 
pation in  the  blessings  of  God's  sanctuary.  Confident  in  their  own 
claim  to  the  peculiar  favor  and  promises  of  heaven,  they  are 
found  boasting,  that  they  can  call  Abraham  their  father,  and 
that  theirs  are  the  oracles  of  God,  with  the  urim  and  thummim 
of  sacred  ordinances.  On  these  do  they  build  their  assured 
reliance,  and  while  they  say  to  us,  who  by  their  decision  are 
"  afar  off," — stand  by,  for  we  are  holier  than  ye, — in  all  the  sancti- 
moniousness of  these  ancient  pharisees,  do  they  exclaim,  with 
endless  repetition,  "the  temple  of  the  Lord — the  temple  of  the 
Lord — the  temple  of  the  Lord  are  we."  ^ 

Do  we  allege  these  things  without  foundation,  or  on  insuffi- 
cient grounds  ?     "  We  trow  not." 

There  is  a  time  to  speak,  and  a  time  to  be  silent.  There  is 
a  tin)e,  when  to  be  silent  is  treachery ;  and  to  speak,  fidelity. 
Such  a  time  to  speak  is  come,  when  charity  is  violated,  and  the 
law  of  brotherly  kindness  set  at  naught ;  when  character  is 
blackened  and  rightful  claims  are  denied  ;  when  truth  itself  is  en- 
slaved to  the  exclusive  interests  of  a  party  ;  and  when  not  only 
we,  but  all  who  may  look  to  us  for  guidance  and  direction,  are 
blotted  from  the  book  of  life,  expunged  from  the  roll  of  christian 
churches,  and  positively  declared  to  be  "  as  the  heathen." 

The  doctrine  now  inculcated,  and  to  which  we  object,  is  sum- 
marily this  :  That  there  is  an  order  of  ministers  in  the  christian 
church  distinct  from,  and  superior  to  presbyters ;  and  who 
are   exclusively  entitled  to  be  called   bishops.     That  these,  are 

1)  Zeph.  iii.  11.  of  this  tendency  to  trust  in  names  and 

2)  See  Note  A.  privileges  in  Archbishop   Whatelej's 

3)  See  a  very  valuable  illustration      Origin  of  Romish  Errors,  ch.  6.  §  3. 


LECT.  I.]  THE    BIGOTRY   OF   PRELATISTS.  3 

by  divine  right,  and  not  merely  by  human  appointment;  —  that 
they  possess  prerogatives,  by  pre-eminence,  their  own — that 
they,  alone,  are  empowered  to  ordain,  —  that  their  ordination  is 
essential  to  the  validity  of  a  true  gospel  ministry — that  they  pos- 
sess, and  can  alone  bestow,  the  gifts  of  the  Holy  Spirit — and 
that,  without  them,  all  preaching,  and  all  or  dinances,  administer- 
ed by  such  as  were  ordained  in  other  denominations,  are  "  vain," 
and  "  without  the  promise  of  Christ,"  and  of  course  delusive, 
not  only  as  it  regards  us  who  minister,  but  those  also  to  whom 
we  minister  in  holy  things. 

Presbyterian  ministers  are  therefore  branded  as  "  pretended 
ministers"'  — as  guilty  of  "  presumption  and  daring  imposture, ^'"^ 
as  no  "ministry,"  and  their  churches  "no  churches"^  but 
"withered  branches"*  —  as  "unauthorized  sects. "^ 

We  are  "  protestant  sectaries  "^  —  "  sectarians  "^  —  "  the 
meetingers"^  —  "schismatics"^  —  "guilty  of  a  most  griev- 
ous sin"  and  of"  wicked  errors"  —  "self-appointed  teachers"" 
"  dissenting  mountebanks  " —  and  "  those  beings  who  pretend  — 
to  be  ministers  of  the  gospel  and  really  are  ministers  of  hell."' 

"  It  is  utterly  unlawful  to  attend  our  ministry,"  and  to  hear  us 
"  is  rebellion  against  God."^^ 

"  Our  Baptism  is  a  mockery,  which  may  sprinkle  with  water  on 
earth,  but  cannot  admit  souls  to  the  kingdom  of  heaven.""* 

We  are  declared  to  be  as  totally  different  from  the  true  church 
and  the  true  ministry,  "  as  a  mouse  is  from  a  bat,"'^  or  as  "  one 
kind  of  flesh  is  from  another"'^ —  "  they  are  in  the  church,  we 
are  out  of  it."'^ 

We  are  therefore  (and  if  all  this  is  true,  we  are  justly)  "  ex- 
communicated," as  being  guilty  of  "  a  sin  against  our  brethren, 
against  ourselves,  against  God  —  a  sin  which,  if  not  repented  of, 
is  eternally  destructive  to  the  soul,"'^  since  "all  our  acts  of  se- 
parate worship  "  are  to  be  ranked  among  the  works  of  dark- 
ness." 

Our  church  "  sessions   are  meddling,  inquisitorial  courts."'^ 

1)  High-churchism,  No.  3,  §  31,  11)  High-churchism,  No.  3,  §  52. 
as  published  by  the  Author.  See  12)  The  Rev.  T.  S.  Escott  in  plea 
Note  A.  for  Presbytery,  Glasg.  1840.  p.  v. 

2)  Ibid.  §  52.  13)  British  Critic,Oct.  1839,  p.  337. 

3)  Ibid.  §  41.  14)  Ibid.  p.  338. 

4)  Ibid.  §  4G.  15)  Ibid.  p.  341. 

5)  Ibid.  §  48.  16)  Palmer  on  the  Church,  vol.1. 

6)  Ibid.  §  52.  p.  54  and  59   and  70,  and   vol.  2,  p. 

7)  Ibid.  §  54.  323.     English  Ed. 

8)  Ibid.  §  4.5.  17)  Ibid.  p.  70,  71. 

9)  Ibid.  §  31.  18)  Soames'    Elorabethian  Relig. 
10)  Ibid.  §  47.                                        Hist.  p.  587,  592,  et  passim. 


PREVALENCE    OF    HIGH-CHURCHISM. 


[lect.  I. 


"  Our  whole  system  involves  errors  in  fundamental  doctrines,"' 
while  presbytery  and  episcopacy  are  declared  to  be  two  oppo- 
sites.'^ 

"  Whereas,"  says  Bishop  Beveridge,  "  in  the  private  meetings, 
where  their  teachers  have  no  apostolical  or  episcopal  imposition 
of  hands,  they  have  no  ground  to  succeed  the  apostles,  nor  by 
consequence  any  right  to  the  spirit  which  our  Lord  hath  ;  with- 
out which,  although  they  preach  their  hearts  out,  I  do  not  see 
what  spiritual  advantage  can  accrue  to  their  hearers  by  it.'" 

This  is  no  more  than  a  fractional  illustration  of  that  language 
and  sentiment  which  are  now  prevalent  in  reference  to  Presby- 
terianism.  It  may  be  thought,  however,  that  this  is  the  language 
of  only  some  few,  illiberal,  bigoted  and  extravagant  writers. 
But  this  is  not  the  case. 

This  system  is  not  only  found  in  the  writings  of  many  old  and 
standard  divines  of  the  Church  of  England,*  of  whom  forty-three 
are  quoted  in  No.  74  of  the  Oxford  Tracts  ;  it  is  not  only  re- 
ceiving extensive  currency,  by  the  able  and  zealous  advocacy  of 
certain  eminent  divines  of  Oxford  ;  it  has  not  only  been  avowed 
by  some  of  the  English  prelates,  and  by  two  thousand  of  the 
English  clergy  ;  but  it  is  now  extending  itself  widely  through  the 


1)  Oxford  Tr.,  vol.  ],  Am.  Ed. 

2)  Dr.  Pusey's  Letter  to  the 
Bishop  of  Oxford,  p.  100.  Am.  Ed. 

3)  Sermon  on  Christ's  presence 
with  his  ministers  ;  in  Works,  vol.  2. 

4)  See  the  list  of  them  in  the  Ox- 
ford Tracts,  vol.  3,  Tract  74. 

5)  Very  erroneous  conceptions 
prevail  of  the  extent  to  which  these 
high-church  principles,  as  developed 
by  their  recent  advocates,  have  been 
diffused. 

These  doctrines,  says  an  English 
episcopal  press,  "  are  every  where 
creeping  into  houses  and  into  churches 
too."  '•  Fuseyism,"  which  is  scarcely 
a  modification  of  popery,  is  increasing 
most  fearfully  ;  its  votaries  boast  that 
TWO  THOUSAND  clergymen  of  the  es- 
tablished church  have  publicly  or  pri- 
vately announced  themselves  converts 
to  its  erroneous  doctrines."  Plea  for 
Presb.  p.  522. 

A  Roman  catholic  priest,  in  Great 
Britain,  in  a  public  meeting  recently 
stated,  that  out  of  fifteen  thousand 
clergymen  of  the  Episcopal  church, 
eleven  thousand  have  embraced  these 
sentiments.  The  proportion  is  by  no 
means  so  large  in  this  country,  and 
the  statements  respecting  the  church 
of  England  may  be  exaggerated. 


As  to  the  extent  of  the  influence  of 
these  views,  see  also  Professor  Pow- 
ell, of  Oxford,  in  his  recent  work, 
*'  Tradition  Unveiled,  or  An  Exposure 
of  the  Pretensions  andTendency  of  Au- 
thoritative Teaching  in  the  Church." 
Lond.  1839,  p.  1,2.  "  It  is  clear,"  he 
says  (p.  4)  of  these  opinions  of  church 
authority,  and  others  dependent  on  it, 
that  they  "  have  been  extensively 
adopted  and  are  strenuously  upheld, 
and  are  daily  gaining  ground  among 
a  considerable  and  influential  portion 
of  the  members  as  well  as  ministers  of 
the  established  church." 

Dr.  Pusey  boasts  of  "  the  almost 
electric  rapidity  with  which  these 
principles  are  confessedly  passing  from 
one  breast  to  another,  from  one  end  of 
England  to  another."  Letter,  page 
230,  231,  Edn  2.— and  also  of  "the 
sympathy  which  they  found  in  the 
sister  and  daughter  churches  of  Scot- 
land and  America."  The  testimony 
of  R.  M.  Beverly  Esq.,  who  was  him- 
self educated  at  one  of  the  universi- 
ties, is  of  weight.  In  his  "  Heresy  of 
Human  Priesthood,"  he  says,  "At  last, 
however,  the  old  Landean  fever  has 
revived,  and  has  spread  its  contagion 
through  all  ranks  of  the  clergy ;  a 
swarm  of  unknown  and  inferior  priests 


LECT.  I.]  THE    DEMAND    FOR    INVESTIGATION.  5 

protestant  episcopal  churches  in  this  country  ;  has  been  avowed 
by  some  American  prelates;  by  some  leading  journals — by  some 
of  their  periodicals — and  by  some  of  their  ministers,  in  this  very 
city.' 

Acting  on  these  principles,  the  episcopal  church,  by  her 
Canons,  prohibits  her  ministers  from  allowing  a  minister  of  any 
other  denomination  to  preach  in  any  of  her  pulpits  —  while 
they,  who  fully  adopt  these  principles  of  high-churchisra,  most 
carefully  avoid  any  possible  occasion — as  for  instance  co-operat- 
ing in  the  advancement  of  any  work  of  common  charity  or  bene- 
volence—  by  which  they  might  "even  seem  "  to  acknowledge 
our  claim  to  the  character  of  christian  ministers.  The  most 
zealous  efforts  are  also  made  to  put  into  the  widest  possible  cir- 
culation, those  works,  pamphlets  and  tracts  in  which  these  views 
are  most  boldly  and  pertinaciously  advanced.  By  these,  and 
other  means,  the  minds  of  many  in  our  communion  have  been 
already  excited  to  inquiry  on  these  great  questions  —  while  the 
minds  of  all  must,  sooner  or  later,  be  turned  anxiously  to  the 
settlement  of  the  fundamental  principles  which  they  involve. 
From  these  causes,  in  different  parts  of  this  country,  as  well  as 
in  England  and  Ireland,  ministers  of  our  own,  and  other  protes- 
tant denominations,  have  felt  called  upon  to  appear  in  vindica- 
tion of  their  claim  to  membership  in  the  holy,  catholic,  and 
apostolic  church  of  Christ. 

Urged  by  a  strong  conviction  of  duty,  we  have  also  deter- 
mined to  examine  those  assumptions,  whereby  we  are  to  be 
despoiled  of  all  right  and  title  to  the  character  of  a  church  of 
Christ  —  the  possession  of  christian  ordinances  —  and  a 
christian  ministry.  The  reasons  —  or  some  of  them  —  why 
this  course  appears  plainly  and  imperatively  demanded  of  us, 
we  will  at  this  time  present. 

This  open  discussion  of  these  high  and  exclusive  claims,  we 
owe  to  their  authors  and  abettors. 

However  desirable  and  proper  it  is  for  christians  to  live  in 

may  now  justify  the  adoption  ofFu-  gress  of  those  sentiments  to  the  sup- 
seyistic  opinions,  by  reference  to  the  port  of  which  those  tracts  were  main- 
prelates  of  Oxford  and  Lincoln,  and  ly  devoted. 

it  is  believed,  to  the  Archbishop  of  1)  For  proof  of  this  see  the  Charles- 
Canterbury  also."  Ed.  2d.  pub.  in  ton  Gospel  Messenger  for  July,  1840, 
1839,  pp.  li.  74.  See  also  p.  81.  pp.  103,  118,  et  passim, and  also  the 
See  further  the  Review  of  Tracts  for  quotations  which  shall  be  subsequently 
the  Times,  Number  Ninety,  in  Edinb.  introduced.  See  also  British  Critic, 
Rev.,  April  1841,  p.  14G.  Oct.    1837,  343,  pp.  285,    305,     308, 

The  recent  restriction  put  upon  the  309,  and  324,  326,  327. 

publication  of  what  are  termed  "  The  See  also  Presb.  Defd.  p.  27,  and  p. 

Oxford    Tracts,"    will    in   no   degree  130. 
retard,  but   rather  advance    the   pro- 


6 


INVESTIGATION    DEMANDED    BY    OPPONENTS.  [lECT.  I. 


peace  and  brotherhood — yet,  when  that  peace  is  broken  by 
the  incessant  shouts  of  war,  and  this  brotherhood  is  scornfully 
rejected  as  "impious  opposition  to  the  divine  will'"  —  it  is 
time  to  proclaim  —  "  amicus  Socrates,  amicus  Plato,  sed  magis 
an)ica  Veritas."*  And  however  we  might  feel  justified  in 
bearing  patiently  personal  contumely  or  wrong  —  yet,  when  it  is 
the  character  and  claims  of  the  church  that  are  in  question,  we 
are  surely  required,  by  an  imperious  call  of  duty,  "  to  vindicate 
the  perverted  truth  and  abused  ordinances  of  our  blessed 
Master.'" 

In  accepting,  therefore,  the  call  to  this  discussion,  we  make 
no  assault  upon  the  christian  character  and  standing  of  those 
churches  denominated  episcopal.  The  question  is  not,  "  is 
episcopacy  right,  or  is  it  wrong  —  of  scriptural  or  of  human 
origin  ?  "  That  episcopacy  does  not  destroy  the  being  of  a 
true  church  of  Christ  is  cheerfully  granted ;  for  we  ourselves 
claim  the  possession  of  primitive  and  apostolical  episcopacy. 
Our  ministers  are  styled  tpiscopoi  (E7rzo"/C7ro<)  or  bishops, — 
and  our  polity  is  the  scriptural  episcopacy. 


1)  Palmer,  on  the  Church,  vol.  ii. 
page  323. 

2)  "Plato  is  my  friend,  so  is  Soc- 
rates ;  but  truth  is  a  friend  I  prize 
above  both." 

3)  This  challenge  is  given  by  Mr. 
Kebie,  in  his  work  on  primitive  tra- 
dition, in  the  very  fulness  of  confident 
victory.  He  complains  bitterly  of 
that  "  light,  extemporal  way  in  which 
many  reject  it,"  and  calls  upon  its 
rejectors  in  the  language  applied  of 
old  to  an  impatient  controversialist, 
"  strike,  but  hear  me."  "  Do  your  best 
in  argument,  if  you  can  any  how  re- 
fute the  claim  of  the  succession  ;  but 
do  not  dismiss  it  unexamined,  in  any 
kind  of  hasty  feeling.  Do  not  set  it 
aside,"  &c.     Edition,  4th,  p.  95,  96. 

These  doctrines  are  most  fully 
avowed  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Odenheimer, 
of  Philadelphia,  in  his  Origin  and 
Compilation  of  the  Prayer  Book. 
Phil.  Id4 1,  see  passim.  He  even  ven- 
tures so  far  as  to  denominate  all  non- 
episcopalians  as  dissenters,  (e.  g.  pp. 
33,  46  )  and  the  Episcopalian  as  the 
only  legitimate  branch  of  the  church 
catholic  in  America.   See  p  106,  113. 

The  notorious  sermon  of  Dr.  Hook, 
"  Hear  the  Church,"  has  been  also 
republished  by  the  Bishop  of  New 
Jersey,  "whose  untiring  efforts  for  the 
dissemination  of  Catholic  trutli  and 
practice,  claim  the  gratitude  and  love 


of  American  churchmen  !"  See  do. 
do.  p.  53  ;  Note. 

So  also  in  the  Preface  to  No.  74,  of 
the  Oxford  Tracts.  "  Persnns  who 
object  to  our  preaching  distinctly  and 
unhesitatingly  the  doctrine  of  the 
apostolic  succession,  must  be  asked 
to  explain,  why  we  may  not  do  what 
our  fathers  in  the  church  have  done 
before  us,  or  whether  they  too,  as 
well  as  we,  are  mistaken,  or  injudi- 
cious theorists,  or  papists,  in  so  doing? 
This  question  is  here  plainly  put  to 
them  ;  and  at  the  same  time  the  at- 
tention of  inquirers  wlio  have  not 
made  up  their  minds  on  the  subject,  is 
invited  to  the  answer,  if  any  is  Ibrth- 
coming,  from  the  parties  addressed." 
Oxf  Tr.  No  74,  vol  3,  p.  129. 

This  doctrine  will  be  found  contain- 
ed in  the  most  elementary  catechisms 
of  our  opponents.  See,  for  instance, 
the  catechism  prepared  by  Bishop 
England  (Roman  catholic)  "  for  young 
children,  servants,  &c."  p.  27,  28,  and 
his  larger  catechism,  p.  23. 

See  also  the  church  primer  of  the 
protestant  episcopal  church,  passim 
and  p  12  —  and  Hobarts  Catechism, 
(number  three)  at  p.  46,  &c.  and  the 
short  catechism  at  the  end  of  Bay- 
ard's Anniversary  Sermon  to  the 
Prot.  Ep.  Sund.  Sch.  Un.,  from  Cat. 
No.  iii. 


LECT,  I.]  THIS    DISCUSSION    NOT   ABOTTT   EPISCOPACY.  7 

That  this  discussion  does  not  turn  upon  the  mere  question  of 
episcopacy,  and  that  therefore,  in  pursuing  it,  we  are  not  to  be 
regarded  as  either  opposing  or  denouncing  episcopacy,  as  such 
— this,  I  say,  is  granted  even  by  our  opponents.  "  We  are," 
say  they,  "  of  THE  CHURCH,  not  of  the  episcopal  church 
— our  bishops  are  not  merely  an  order  in  her  organization,  but 
THE  PRINCIPLE  OF  HER  CONTINUANCE ;  and  to  Call  ourselvcs 
Episcopalians,  is  to  imply,  that  we  differ  from  the  mass  of  dis- 
senters mainly  in  church  government  and  form  ;  whereas  the 
difference  is,  that  we  are  here,  and  they  are  there  :  we  in  the 
CHURCH,  AND  THEY  OUT  OF  IT."'  "  It  may  sccm  harsh,"  they 
add  "  to  speak  thus  of  episcopacy  and  episcopalian,  yet 
we  hope  it  will  not  shock  any  one,  if  we  say,  that  we  wish  the 
words — as  denoting  an  opinion  and  its  maintainers — never  had 
been  invented.  They  have  done  great  mischief  to  our  own 
cause. "^  "  Apostolic  order,"  and  not  "  the  episcopate,  or 
the  liturgy  "  form  the  corona,  or  crown,  which  adorns  their 
kingly  head.  "  Our  all,"  say  they,  "  as  we  cannot  but  know, 
depends  upon  that  holy  succession."^  The  argument,  there- 
fore, now  entered  upon,  is  not  about  episcopacy,  which  is 
thus  repudiated  as  containing  (as  indeed  it  does)  nothing  pecu- 
liar to  themselves,*  nor  is  it  about  liturgical  services,^  which 
do  not  constitute  their  distinctive  characteristic — but  it  is  about 
the  all-important  and  essential  question — which  is,  confessedly, 
fundamental  to  all  well-grounded  hopes  of  eternal  life — where 
is,  and  where  is  not,  the  church  of  Christ,  and  the  way  of  sal- 
vation ? 

This  church,  and  this  way  of  salvation,  are  limited  by  these 
prelatists,  or  high-churchmen,  to  those  only,  who  either  are 
members  of,  or  who  fraternize  with,  the  anglican  church. 
All  others  are  guilty,  they  say,  of  "renouncing  the  church  of 
Christ  —  a  renouncing  of  her  ministers,  and  through  them  of 
Christ  himself."  They  "  cannot,  therefore,"  it  is  said,  "  expect 
to  be  considered  as  christians,  but,  according  to  the  command 
of  Christ,  as  heathens  and  publicans."® 

1)  "  The  American  Church."  See  5)  "  He,"  Archbishop  Usher,  as  is 
in  British  Critic,  Oct.  1839,  p  341 .           declared   by  Dr.    Bernard,  "  was  for 

2)  See   ditto,  p.  341 .      See,  also,  the  minister's  improving  of  their  gifts 
p   340,  and  p.  337,  338.  and  abilities  in  prayer  before    sermon 

3)  Oxf.   Tr.   vol.  i.  p.  376.     Am.  and  after,  according  to  his  own  prac- 
Edit.  and  p.  5o5.  tice."    The   Judgment    of    the    late 

4)  But  we  may  give  up  "  ^own5,  Archbishop  of    Armagh,  &c.    Lond. 
robes,    surplicfis,    christmns  festivals,  1657,  p.  149,  150. 

and  even  a  liturgy  and  still  be  as  dis-  G)   See    Letters   to   a  Dissenting 

tinctly  as  we    are    now   an   episcopal  Minister,  by  L.  S.  E.  recommended  by 

church.    These  are  not  essentials  to  an  the  Bishop  of  London  in  "  Schism," 

Episcopal  organization."     Dr.  Clark's  p.  351. 
Letters  on  the  Ch.  Phil.  1839,  p.  29. 


8 


SYSTEM   DENOMINATED    HIGH-CHURCHISM. 


[lect.  I. 


To  characterize  this  system,  we  use  the  terms  prelacy,  or 
high-churchisin  —  terms  which  they  themselves  adopt,  which 
are  currently  applied  in  a  good  sense,  and  which  cannot  there- 
fore be  offensive.' 

In  rejecting  their  claim  to  supremacy,  and  to  a  fallible  infal- 
libility, we  are  accused  of  abetting  heresy  and  socinianism,^  and 
thus  branded  with  names  of  the  greatest  possible  opprobrium. 

Seeing,  therefore,  that  prelatists  are  thus  bold  and  uncom- 
promising in  hurling  their  dread  anathemas  against  us  —  while 
"to  seek  controversy  is  hateful,"  "to  shrink  from  it"  in 
such  circumstances,  "  were  indeed  pusillanimous."  The  exam- 
ination of  this  subject  is  a  debt  we  owe  to  them,  that  wherein 
they  are  wrong,  as  we  believe  them  to  be  far  wrong,  we  may 
correct  their  errors,  as  God  shall  give  us  opportunity  —  and  that 
whereas  they  are  straining  every  nerve  to  diffuse  their  erro- 
neous principles,  we  may,  if  possible,  counteract  their  injurious 
influence,  and  arrest  their  desolating  progress. 


1)  The  currency  of  this  distinction 
between  high  and  low  church  as 
early  even  as  the  I7th  century,  will 
strikingly  appear  from  a  treatise  en- 
titled "  The  Distinction  of  High- 
churchand  Low-church  distinctly  con- 
sidered and  fairly  stated,"  published  in 
London  in  the  year  1705,  and  "hum- 
bly offered  to  the  consideration  of  the 
ensuing  parliament  and  convocation." 
p.  56. 

The  work  was  written  by  a  high 
churchman  who  endeavors,  by  defin- 
ing his  terms  so  as  to  suit  his  own 
purposes,  to  prove  that  low  churchmen 
were  notciiurchmen  at  all.  On  page  7 
he  says,  "  I  know  no  odious  or  spe- 
cious characters  that  have  made  more 
noise,  nor  passed  through  the  world 
with  so  much  license  and  authority 
as  the  distinction  of  high-church 
and  low-church  with  the  fair  spoken 
plea  of  moderation."  On  page  24  he 
speaks  of  the  term  High  Church  "  as 
generally  used  and  applied  ;" — on  p. 
25,  of"  the  odious  character  of  a  high 
churchman;" — on  page  35  he  speaks 
of  the  "  qui  uninodicuni  as  an  intem- 
perate and  undue  affection,  as  some- 
thing in  the  extreme,  as  the  terra 
high  slily  indicates." 

He  shews  on  p.  34,  that  "  it  is  not 
open  and  professed  enemies  that  do  us 
the  mischief,  but  they  that  walk  in 
the  house  of  God  as  friends,  and  are 
doing  the  work  of  the  dissenters  in 
the  shop  of  the  church. 


" Hunc  tu  Romane  caveto," 

thus  showing  how  tenderly  these 
parties  at  that  day  regarded  one  anoth- 
er in  the  bonds  of  their  professed 
union  and  fraternity. 

On  the  use  of  the  term  high-church, 
See  Charleston  Gospel  Messenger, 
Feb.  1840,  p.  368;  Dr.  Hook  in  Lond. 
Christ.  Observer,  1839,  p.  657,  and 
defined  in  do.  p.  658  ;  Dr  Hook's  call 
to  Union,  (Am.  Ed.)  p.  84,  86,  88,  90, 
131 ,  44,  45,  57,  59,  65 ;  Palmer  on  the 
Church,  vol.  l,p.  259;  Soames' Rel. 
Hist,  of  the  Elizab'n  Age,  p.  150,  366, 
462,  583  ;  Burnet's  Hist,  of  the  Ref- 
ormation, vol.  1,  p.  xvi,  xvii.  and 
xviii ;  see  also  a  full  account  of  the 
difference  between  the  high  and  low 
churchmen  in  Burnet's  Pastoral  Care, 
preface. 

For  further  remarks  see  Note  B,  also 
Archbishop  Seeker  in  his  letter  to 
Mr.  VValpole  in  Crit.  Comment,  on  p. 
26 ;  Bishop  Fleetwood  in  Lond.  Chr. 
Obs.  1841,  p.  12;  see  also  the  tract 
of  the  Protestant's  Episcopal  Tract 
Society ;  "  The  High  chtirchman 
vindicated,"  N.  Y.  1837.  Warburton's 
Works,  vol,  7,  p.  83.  "  The  Church 
of  England  and  in  America  Com- 
pared." N.  Y.  1841,  p.  6. 

2)  See  Oxf  Tr.  vol.  ),  p.  383; 
also,  p.  320 :  also,  N.  York  Review, 
Jan.  1840  p.  320,  321. 


LECT.  I.]      THIS  EXAMINATION  DUE  TO  OURSELVES. 


9 


Our  apology,  therefore,  were  any  due,  for  attempting  such  an 
arduous  undertaking,  must  rest  upon  the  infinite  importance  of 
the  subject,  our  extreme  soUcitude  to  impress  what  appears  to 
us  right  sentiments  respecting  it,  together  with  the  considera- 
tion that  the  confidence  which  ill  becomes  the  innovators  "  up- 
on christian  truth  and  charity,  however  able  and  learned,  may 
be  pardoned  in  the  defenders,  however  weak,  of  a  system, 
which"  rests  upon  the  foundation  of  apostles  and  prophets, 
Jesus    Christ   himself   being    the  chief    corner  stone.' 

But  in  the  second  place,  we  would  remark,  that  we  are  under 
obligations  to  institute  this  investigation,  by  a  due  regard  to  our 
own  character  and  our  just  claims. 

The  church  of  the  living  God,  we  believe  to  be  the  pillar 
and  ground  of  the  truth  —  the  repository  of  "  the  oracles  of 
God"  —  the  source  of  heavenly  wisdom — the  fountain  of 
life  —  the  centre  of  divine  influences — the  birthplace  of  souls 

—  the  celestial  ladder — the  kingdom  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ 

—  the  house  and  family  of  God,  out  of  which  there  is  no  or- 
dinary possibility  of  salvation.^ 

We  also  further  believe,  that  unto  this  cathoUc,  visible  church, 
Christ  hath  given  the  ministry,  oracles,  and  ordinances  of  God, 


1 .)  In  order  to  appreciate  the  call 
made  upon  us  to  defend  our  assailed 
bulwarks,  let  us  imagine  ourselves  to 
be  Episcopalians,  and  that  declarations 
similar  to  those  now  fulminated  against 
Presbyterians,  were  addressed  to  Epis 
copaiians  by  Presbyterians.  Let  the 
Rev.  John  A.  Clark,  Rector  of  St 
Andrew's  church,  Philadelphia,  and 
who  is  himself  a  most  wortiiy  and  es- 
teemed minister  in  the  episcopal 
church,  let  him  desciibe  what  would, 
in  such  circumstances,  be  our  neces- 
sary conclusions.  "  How  would  it 
strike  us,"  askslliis  writer,"  ifaiiotiier 
denommation  were  to  assert,  to  jjreach 
from  the  ])ulpit,  and  publisli  through 
religious  papers,  that  the  episcopal 
church  was  no  church  at  all  —  a 
mere  unauthorized  human  institution 
—  that  it  had  no  valid  or  authorized 
ministry — that  its  preachers  were 
nothing  more  than  laymen  —  that  it 
had  no  sacraments  —  that  baptism  and 
the  holy  supper,  being  administered 
by  unauthorized  hands,  were  of  no 
efficacy,  and  that  if  any  belonging  to 
this  body  were  saved,  it  would  not  be 
because  they  had  been  brought  within 
the  covenant  promises,  but  because 


God  in  his  sovereignty  "  will  have 
mercy  on  whom  he  will  have  mercy." 
Were  a  large  and  influential  denomi- 
nation of  christians  to  assume  this 
stand,  and  proclaim  these  views, 
would  not  our  prejudices  be  aroused  ? 
Would  you  not  then  say  with  some 
reason,  "  Shall  we  sit  still,  and  see 
ourselves  swept  off  the  face  of  Chris- 
tendom by  the  restless  spirits  of  the 
age .'  "  Letters  on  the  Church,  Phila. 
Ib39,  p.  23. 

The  same  writer  gives  the  follow- 
ing illustration  of  the  zeal  with 
which  episcopacy  is  advanced.  "  I 
have  heard  a  minister  occupy  his  au- 
dience with  this  topic  exclusively  up- 
on a  communion  Sunday,  without  a 
word  about  the  spiritual  qualifica- 
tions we  ought  to  possess  in  coming 
to  the  Lord's  supper,  with  no  reference 
to  Christ,  or  the  emblems  that  repre- 
sented his  dying  love,  save  the  re- 
mark, that  this  ordinance  would  be 
valid  only  when  administered  by  prop- 
erly authorized  hands.  I  have  even 
heard  this  made  the  topic  of  discourse 
at  a  funeral."     Do.  do.  p.  24. 

2.  See  Conf  of  Faith,   chap.    XIV. 


10  THE    SUBJECT    OF    VITAL    IMPORTANCE.  [lECT.    I. 

for  the  gathering  and  perfecting  of  the  saints  in  this  hfe,  to  the 
end  of  the  world,  and  doth  by  his  own  presence  and  spirit,  ac- 
cording to  his  promise,  make  them  effectual  thereto.' 

And  still  further,  we  believe,  that  as  "  all  saints  are  united  to 
sus  Christ,  their  Head,  by  his  spirit  and  faith,"  and  they  have 
"  ALL  fellowship  with  him  ;"  so  are  "  all  saints  bound  to  maintain 
an  holy  fellowship  and  communion  in  the  worship  of  God,  to 
their  mutual  edification,'"  by  a  public  profession  of  their  com- 
mon faith,  and  their  consequentunion  with  the  church  of  Christ. 
He  who  wilfully  fails  thus  to  confess  Christ  before  men,  and 
to  show  forth  his  death,  in  the  appointed  ordinance  of  the  Lord's 
supper,  —  him  will  Christ  deny  before  his  Father  and  his 
angels. 

Hence,  it  is  manifest,  that  the  question,  whether  we  are  or 
are  not,  as  a  presbyterian  church,  a  living  branch  of  the  good 
olive  tree,  a  truly  scriptural  and  apostolic  church  of  Jesus 
Christ  —  is  not  a  question  of  small  or  trifling  import,  but  of  the 
most  grave  and  serious  moment.  Are  our  claims  to  such  a 
character  invalid  ?  Are  our  marks,  wherein  we  show  the  im- 
press of  a  divine  commission,  a  forgery?  Are  our  ministers 
intruders,  deceivers,  hypocrites,  unsent,  uncalled,  and  unauthori- 
zed? Are  our  ordinances  mere  human  ceremonies,  unaccom- 
panied by  any  virtue  or  grace  from  on  high  ?  Then  surely  it 
is  all  important  that  we  should  make  a  timely  discovery  of  the 
rottenness  of  that  foundation  on  which  we  have  builded  our 
house,  before  the  floods  rise  and  the  winds  beat  upon  it,  and  we 
are  overwhelmed  in  the  dreadful  ruin. 

Are  prelatists  in  exclusive  possession  of  the  keys  of  the 
kingdom  of  heaven  ?  so  that  whomsoever  they  admit  on  earth, 
shall  be  welcomed  in  heaven  ;  and  whomsoever  they  exclude  on 
earth,  shall  be  refused  admission  there  ?  Then,  who  will  deny 
that  the  voluntary  neglect  of  principles  which  would,  in  this 
case,  become  divine,  and  separation  from  a  church  so  constitut- 
ed, or  union  with  any  other  —  is  schism,  and  a  sin  of  no  ordinary 
magnitude? 

We  owe  it,  then,  to  ourselves,  in  view  of  our  best  interests  — 
even  our  everlasting  welfare  —  to  examine  well  into  the  grounds 
of  our  confidence  ;  that,  if  deceived  by  others,  or  if  deceiving 
our  own  selves,  wc  may,  while  there  is  opportunity,  fly  from 
the  impending  danger.  We  owe  it  to  our  children,  and  to  all 
over  whom  our  example  may  have  any  influence,  to  ascertain 

1.  See  Conf.  of  Faith,  Chap.  XXV.  §3.    2.  See  Conf.  of  Faith,  Chap.  XXV. 


LECT.    I.]  THE    DISCUSSION    IN    SELF-DEFENCE.  11 

the  perfect  soundness  of  that  vessel  wherein  they  are  to  venture 
the  perilous  vo}'age  of  eternity. 

On  the  other  hand,  are  we  right  in  our  views,  and  are  prela- 
tists  mistaken,  when  they  represent  our  denominational  character 
as  "  resistance  to  the  love,  power  and  wisdom  of  God,  and  the 
punishment  —  the  wrath  of  God  ? '' ' —  then  are  we  as  truly  called 
upon  to  justify  our  character  and  claims,  in  order  that  the 
"  schismatical  distance  and  alienation  between  religious  denomina- 
tions,'' originated  by  these  exclusive  pretensions  to  divine  right, 
may  attach  in   all  its  certain  criminality  to  its  true  authors. 

Since  it  is  publicly  taught,  that  "but  for  the  episcopal  church 
in  this  country,  there  would  be  nothing  but  the  extremes  of  infi- 
delity or  fanaticism"^  —  since  in  every  way,  in  every  place,  and 
by  every  means — 'prelatists  are  endeavoring  to  undermine,  by 
misrepresentation,  the  doctrines  and  order  of  presbyterianism  — 
since  the  cry  is  now  raised  against  our  church  in  particular, 
*' raze  it  —  raze  it  to  the  foundation'"  —  shall  we  not  stand  on 
the  defensive;  and,  as  far  as  the  "panoply  of  God,"  "  the  ar- 
mor of  righteousness,"  and  the  weapons  which  are  "  spiritual 
and  not  carnal,"  shall  enable  us,  repel  the  fiery  assault,  and  pre- 
serve the  endangered  walls  of  our  Zion — that  "  city  set  on  a 
hill,  whose  builder  and  maker  is  God  ? " 

This  we  do  in  self-defence — in  the  spirit  of  repellency,  and 
not  of  attack  —  of  bold  and  uncompromising  adherence  to  what 
we  confidently  believe  to  be  the  truth  and  order  of  God.  We 
have  no  wish  to  depreciate  the  character  of  episcopacy,  as  the 
form  of  a  sister  denomination  of  christians,  and  a  branch  of  the 
true  vine — the  church.  We  question  not  their  rights,  as  church- 
men. We  impugn  not  their  claims  as  christians.  We  reject  not 
their  evidences  of  heaven-taught  piety,  though  they  repudiate 
the  truth  and  genuineness  of  ours.  We  scruple  not  to  enter 
their  temples,  or  to  unite  in  their  worship  ;  though  they  think 
it  scorn  to  participate  with  us  in  our  worship  of  God.  In  short, 
for  ourselves,  we  deprecate  exclusiveness  ;  to  them  we  deny 
nothing  but  monopoly ;  and  for  both  we  supplicate  peace,  purity, 
and  charity  from  God,  who  is  "  the  Author  of  peace,"  and  from 
Christ,  who  is  "  the  Prince  of  peace." 

"  To  the  law  and  to  the  testimony"  is  our  appeal  against  the 
unjust  judgment  of  those,  who  "say  that,  since  prelacy  (epis- 
copacy, in  original)  is  an  ordinance  of  God,  to  abandon  it  is  sin,"* 
— who  thus   presume  to    declare  essential,  what  God  has  not 

1)  See  quoted  in  Schism,  p.  352.      to  the  Bp.   of  Oxford,  p.  143,  Note, 

2)  See  Powell  on  Ap.  Sue.  p.  170.      and    104,    Note.      Oxf   Tr.,    vol.    i, 

3)  Seethe  Report  of  Edinb.  Celc-      Tract  4. 

bration,  p.  63,  64.    Dr.  Pusey'a  Letter  4)  Dr  Pusey's  Letter,  p.  101, 104 


12  WE  APPEAL  TO  THE  [lECT.  I. 

made  necessary — who  thus  command  with  absolute  authority 
what  inspired  apostles  never  ventured  to  require — who  thus 
rush  in  where  angels  would  fear  to  tread ;  and  assuming  the  pre- 
rogatives of  Him,  who  alone  is  Judge,  consign  to  ''  uncovenanted 
mercies"  or  to  "eternal  wrath,"  those  who  boldly  "stand 
fast  in  the  liberty  wherewith  Christ  has  made  them  free." 

Receiving  our  commission  from  those  heavenly  oracles — 
resting  our  credentials  on  their  divine  requirements — submitting 
our  souls  to  every  ordinance  of  heaven — obeying  all  divine 
prescriptions — and  rejoicing  in  the  manifestations  of  God's  favor- 
able mercy  towards  us — we  glory  in  the  hope,  that,  however 
men  may  reject,  "  God  hath  received  us."  We  are  satisfied 
with  a  commission  given  in  the  courts  above  —  a  validity  to 
our  claims,  sealed  with  the  witnessing  of  the  Spirit  of  the  Most 
High  God,  even  though  it  should  not  be  countersigned  by  popes 
or  prelates. 

We  can  thus  fearlessly  ask,  "  Who  shall  curse  whom  God 
has  not  cursed  ? " — drying  up  the  fountain  of  our  baptism ; 
tainting  the  manna  of  our  eucharlst ;  making  our  ministers 
speechless ;  and  breaking  the  sceptre  of  divine  authority  held 
by  those  who  are  over  us  in  the  Lord  ?  Who  shall  excommu- 
nicate those,  who  have  held  to  that  creed,  to  that  succession,  to 
those  ordinances,  to  those  orders,  and  only  those,  which  Christ 
bequeathed  to  them,  in  that  last  divine  testament  which  reveals 
the  whole  will  and  council  of  God  ?^  Who  shall  interpose 
between  our  souls  and  salvation — close  upon  us  the  gates  of 
mercy — and  cut  off  from  all,  beside  themselves,  those  streams 
of  salvation,  which  make  glad  the  city  of  our  God. 

You,  my  brethren,  we  would  have  well  instructed  in  the 
whole  counsel  of  God,  so  that  ye  may  be  able  to  give  a  reason 
of  the  hope  that  is  in  you  to  every  man  that  asketh  it.  Why 
should  you  stand  in  jeopardy  through  doubt  or  ignorance  ?  Be 
ye  not  children  in  understanding,  but  be  men  ;  so  that  ye  may 
be  blown  about  by  no  winds  of  doctrine,  or  sleight  of  men, 
whereby  in  cunning  craftiness  they  would  beguile  your  souls. 

Be  ye  therefore  fully  established  in  your  own  minds ;  know- 
ing whereof  ye  affirm,  and  having  the  profession  of  your  faith 
grounded  in  principles  well  established.  And  thus,  in  that  hasten- 
ing time,  when  the  endangered  rights  of  christian  men  must  be 
abandoned  or  maintained,  ye  may  be  "  able  to  withstand  in  the 
evil  day,"  as  were  the  Presbyterians  of  Scotland  in  one  of  her 
seasons  of  peril  and  distress.^ 

1)  Adopted  in  part  from  Newman  2)  See  Burnet'g  Hist,  of  hisOwn 

on  Romanism,  p.  414.  Times,  vol.  i.  p.  160.     Similar,  also, 


LECT.    I.]  TESTIMONY   OF   GOD.  13 

We  proceed  to  show,  that  such  an  examination  into  "  the 
first  principles  "  whereon  this  prelatical  usurpation  rests,  is  de- 
manded hy  a  regard  to  the  cause  of  truth  and  hberty. 

The  truth  is  a  sacred  deposit,  which  we  are  to  "  buy  "  at  any- 
cost,  and  "  to  sell "  at  no  price  whatever.  It  is  a  treasure  com- 
mitted to  us,  for  which  we  are  "  to  contend  earnestly,"  and  to 
which  we  are  to  "  hold  fast,  without  wavering." 

The  truth  is  the  centre — the  source — the  foundation — the 
citadel,  of  our  liberties.  It  is  "  the  truth,  which  makes  us  free 
indeed  ;"  delivering  us  from  the  bondage  of  "  will  worship,"  and 
"  man  worship,"  of  formality  and  superstition,  and  every  "  cor- 
ruption," whereby  "  the  word  of  God  is  made  of  none  effect 
through  the  traditions  of  men."  Now,  in  this  liberty  wherewith 
Christ  has  made  us  free,  we  are  "  to  stand  fast."  All  aggres- 
sions upon  it  we  are  to  resist.  "  To  those  false  brethren,"  and 
their  doctrines,  "  unawares  brought  in,  who  come  privily  to  spy 
out  the  liberty  we  have  in  Christ  Jesus,  that  they  may  bring  us 
into  bondage — we  are  to  give  place  by  subjection,"  to  their  un- 
scriptural  demands,  "  no,"  says  the  apostle,  "  not  for  an  hour, 
that  the  truth  of  the  Gospel  may  continue  with  us."  (Gal.  ii.  4, 
5.)  Well  might  it  be  declared  of  us,  that  we  "  are  not  worthy" 
of  this  heavenly  birthright,  could  any  thing  "  bewitch  us  to  be 
again  brought  in  bondage  of  the  beggarly  elements  "  of  carnal 
policy  and  earthly  wisdom.  We  might  receive  admonition, 
were  any  such  spirit  ours,  from  the  ancient  synod  of  Nice,  in 
which  it  was  decreed,  that  "  ancient  customs  should  be  retained," 
and  "the  privileges  of  churches  be  preserved."  Or  from  the 
ancient  council  of  Ephesus,  which  decreed,  that  "every  church 
should  preserve  the  rights  which  it  possessed  from  the  beginning, 
lest  the  pride  of  worldly  domination  should  come  in  under  the 
guise  of  the  sacred  ministry  :  and  lest  we  should  imperceptibly 
lose  the  liberty  which  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  purchased  for  us 

was  the  familiarity  of  our  New-Eng-  gospel  direction."  Boston,  1767,  p.  53. 
land  fatliers  with  the  principles  of  So,  also,  could  Dr.  Livingston,  in 
their  ecclesiastical  polity.  his  letter  to  the  same  prelate,  declare 
Dr.  Chauncy,  in  his  letter  to  the  "  that  the  non-episcopalians  in  this 
Bishop  of  Landaff,  could  claim  for  the  country  had  conscientiously  abandon- 
clergy  and  people  of  that  day,  that  ed  a  religion  which  taught  submis- 
*'  they  KNOW  the  errand  of  their  fore-  sion  to  that  prelatial  oppression  where- 
fathers  into  this  country,  and  have  by  those  venerable  persons  were  ex- 
been  well  indoctrinated  in  the  prin-  pelled  their  native  soil,"  and  "  super- 
ciPLES  of  CHRISTIAN  LiBERTV.  We  stitious  attachment  to  rites  and  cere- 
prefer  our  own  mode  of  worship  and  monies  of  human  invention,"  "  and 
discipline  to  that  of  the  English  'tis  devoutly  to  be  wished  their  pos- 
Church;  and  we  do  it  upon  princi-  terity  may  be  never  so  infatuated 
pie,  as  really  believing  that  it  comes  as  to  resume  it."  New  York,  1768, 
nearer  to  the  purity  and  simplicity  of  p.  12. 


14  ALL    THE    REFORMED    CHURCHES    INVOLVED.  [lECT.    I. 

with  his  own  blood."'  Or  from  Cyprian,  who  teaches  us,  "  we 
must  let  no  man  corrupt  the  truth  through  faithless  concessions." 
While,  therefore,  we  take  heed,  that  we  build  our  doctrines 
and  order  on  the  alone  foundation  land  in  Zion,  let  us  not  be 
ashamed  to  own,  avow,  and  proclaim  them  ;  but  rather  let  us 
"glory  in  them,"  and  "magnify,"  and  make  them  honorable. 
In  opposing  the  exclusive  claims  of  prelacy,  and  in  asserting 
those  of  presbytery  to  an  equal  share  in  the  inheritance  of  our 
common  Head — we  are  pleading  not  our  own  cause  merely, 
but  the  cause,  also,  of  all  other  protestant  denominations  f  for 
they  are  equally  placed  under  the  ban  of  this  dread  anathema,' 
and  as  far  as  the  essential  principles  of  ecclesiastical  polity  are 
concerned,  must  stand  or  fall  with  presbyterianism.  We  are 
thus  encouraged  to  stand  fast  in  this  our  liberty,  whether  we 
examine  well  our  foundations,  and  look  round  upon  our  impreg- 
nable bulwarks  ;  or  whether  we  consider  the  number  and  char- 
acter of  our  allied  forces.  "  This  is  the  doctrine  and  prac- 
tice," says  Mr.  Percival,  speaking  of  presbyterianism,  "  on  this 
point,  to  wit,  ordination  by  presbyters,  now  received  by  the 
Lutherans  in  Denmark  and  Germany  ;  by  the  Calvinists  in 
France,  Switzerland,  Germany  and  Holland  ;  by  the  Presbyte- 
rians in  England,  Scotland,  Ireland  and  North  America  ;  and 
by  the  Wesleyan  Methodists.*  These  all  claim,"  says  he,  "  to 
have  received  their  orders  from  some  episcopally  ordained  pres- 
byter." The  Hon.  and  Rev.  Baptist  Noel,  a  minister  of  the 
English  church,  in  a  tract  on  Unity  published  by  him,  in  which  he 
speaks  of  an  individual  who  had  lately  become  a  presbyterian, 
says  :  "  His  conclusions  were  supported  by  several  of  the  re- 
formed churches.  The  Lutheran,  Swiss,  French,  Dutch,  and 
Scotch  churches,  the  church  of  the  Vandois,  and  a  large  and 
pious  section  of  the  American  church,  were  all  on  his  side. 
While  in  favor  of  episcopacy,"  he  adds,  "besides  the  church  of 
Rome,  '  the  mother  of  harlots  and  abominations  of  the  earth, 
drunken  Avith  the  blood  of  the  saints  and  with  the  blood  of  the 
martyrs  of  Jesus ;'  and  the  eastern  churches,  which  are  nearly 
as  corrupt,  he  found  only  the  Church  of  England,  and 
THREE  OR  FOUR  small  scctions  of  the  church  of  Christ  else- 
where, who  had  retained  diocesan  episcopacy."^ 

1)  See  in  Palmer,  vol.  ii.  p.  272,  5)  Among  the  countries  embrac- 
273.  '\ng  presbyterianism,  in  one  or  other 

2)  See  Oxf.  Tr.  vol  i.  p.  400.  of  its  forms,  the   London   Christian 

3)  See  Palmer,  vol.  i.  p.  230,  Observer  for  February,  1841,  p.  73,74, 
where  all  beside  episcopalians  are  an-  enumerates  Scotland,  Germany,  Swit- 
athematized  ;  and  Schism,  p.  290.  zerland,  Prussia,  Holland,  the  Luther- 

4)  On  Ap.  Succ.  p.  9.  an  church  in  Germany,  and  France. 


LECT.    I.]  OUR    SUBMISSION   REQUIRED.  15 

Such,  therefore,  being  the  facts  of  the  case,  when  the 
church-standing  cf  ahiiost  the  entire  protestant  world,  and  the 
christian  character  of  the  purest  churches  under  heaven,  are 
assailed  and  utterly  denied  ;  may  we  not  say,  in  the  language 
of  one  of  these  assailants,  that  the  presbyterian  church  "has 
fairly  been  put  on  her  defence,  and  been  called  upon  to  allege 
grounds  on  which  she  receives  and  maintains  her  doctrines. 
Under  such  circumstances,  no  man  can  be  blamed  who  desires, 
after  the  apostle's  instruction,  to  give  an  answer  to  them  that 
ask  a  reason  of  the  hope  that  is  in  him,  with  meekness  and 
fear."*  "  And  if  there  is,  as  I  think,  every  reason  from  Scrip- 
ture and  tradition,  for  believing  that  it"  —  i.  e.  this  prelatic  doc- 
trine of  apostolic  succession —  "  did  "  not  "  form  part  of  that 
faith,  (which  was  once  delivered  to  the  saints,)  then  who  shall 
blame  us  for  obeying  the  Spirit's  injunction  by  the  mouth  of  the 
apostle,  that  we  should  earnestly  contend  against  it,"  "  and 
for  that  faith  ?  "^  And  this  the  more  especially,  as  "  there  is  a 
consequence  springing  from  these  premises,"  to  continue  the 
words  of  Mr.  Percival,  "  if  established  ;  in  respect,  namely,  of 
the  paramount  and  exclusive  claim  upon  the  obedience  of  all 
christians  within  the  British  (or  prelatic)  dioceses,  which  be- 
longs to  the  bishops  of  those  dioceses  ;  and  which  well  deserves 
the  consideration  of  all  who  refuse  that  obedience,  whether  they 
are  members  of  non-episcopal  communities,  or  profess  to  have 
an  episcopacy  of  their  own."^ 

It  is  thus  made  further  apparent,  that  we  are  challenged  to  the 
consideration  of  this  subject,  —  as  indeed  we  are  distinctly,  in 
the  last  words  of  this  same  writer's  work,  which  is  now 
issued  by  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Tract  Society  of  this  coun- 

"That  the  presbyterian  reformed  Not  to  mention  the  once  famous 
churches  are  more  numerous  and  po-  churches  of  Hungary,  Bohemia,  Po- 
tent than  the  episcopal  reformed  land,  Transylvania,  and  France,  who 
churches,  will  appear  from  this  short  now  by  popish  cruelty  are  in  a  man- 
list  of  those  countries  that  were  re-  ner  reduced. 

formed  from  popery  to  presbyterian-  The  whole  mass  of  the  reformation 

ism.  is    at   this    day    presbyterian,    except 

I.  The  kingdoms  of  Denmark  and  England,  Ireland,  some  of  our  planta- 
Noiway.  tions,  and  the  bishopric  of  Lubeck, 

II.  The  King  of  Prussia'a  domin-      in  Germany." 

ions.  See  "  Rebaptization  Condemned,  by 

III.  There's  the  branching  of  Swe-  the  author  of  Plain  Dealing,  or  Sep- 
den's  extensive  dominions.  aration  without  Schism."  Lond.  1716, 

IV.  Several   provinces  of  the   em-  p.  25. 

Pire.  1)  Percival  on  Ap.  Succ.  p.  10. 

V.  The  United  Provinces.  2)  Percival  on  Ap.  Succ.  p.  142. 

VI.  The  Republic  of  Geneva.  3)  Do.  do.  p.  142. 

VII.  The    Protestant   Swiss   Can- 
tons. 


16  niGH-CHURCHISM    AND   POPERY    SIMILAR.  [lECT.    1. 

try  —  whicli  is  in  extensive  circulation  —  and  a  copy  of  which, 
willi  some  similar  publications,  was  very  recently  sent  to  one 
of  the  families  in  my  own  congregation.  We  are  therefore 
called  upon,  in  all  plainness  and  boldness,  to  show  cause  why 
we  altogether  repudiate  the  asserted  authority  of  any  prelatic 
church  whatever. 

If  the  fact  of  the  re-publication  of  these  Oxford  writings  in 
this  country,  and  their  "  beguiling  many  unwary  and  unstable 
souls,'"  was  deemed  by  Bishop  Mcllvaine  a  sufficient  reason 
for  his  defence  of  those  doctrines  controverted  by  them,  much 
more  is  this — together  with  the  repeated  boast  that  numerous 
converts  had  been  made  from  among  our  clergy — an  amply  suffi- 
cient warrant  for  our  vindication  of  the  liberty  of  Christ  against 
the  unjustifiable  pretensions  embodied  in  this  widely-diffused 
doctrine  of  apostolical  succession.^ 

The  authority  of  the  church,  which  prelatists  make  an  arti- 
cle of  fundamental  importance,^  —  in  other  words,  the  authority 
of  prelates,  —  this  we  believe  to  be  one  of  the  main  pillars  of 
the  gorgeous  structure  of  popery  ;  the  broad  base,  upon  which 
has  been  erected  that  huge  colossal  fabric  of  superstition  and 
spiritual  despotism,  around  which  such  floods  of  human  tears 
and  blood  have  been  made  to  flow.  "  Antichrist,"  say  the 
Waldenses,  in  a  treatise  written  A.  D.  1200,  "  covers  his  ini- 
quity by  the  length  or  succession  of  time  —  by  the  spiritual 
authority  of  the  apostles  —  by  the  writings  of  the  ancients, 
and  by  councils." 

Nor  does  this  system  symbolize  less  with  popery  in  "  enforc- 
ing as  necessary  points  of  faith"  what  are  not  contained  in  the 
creed^  —  nay,  in  resting  these  exorbitant  claims  not  on  the  Bible, 
but  upon  "  oral  tradition,"^  and  the  perverted  dogmas  of  the 
ancient  church.  On  such  grounds  as  these  do  prelatists  pro- 
claim that  the  name  of  catholic  is  appropriated  to  their 
churches,  to  the  utter  exclusion  of  all  the  various  denomina- 
tions of  christians  separated  from  them."  On  these  grounds  do 
they  throw  off  all  fellowship  with  protestants,  and  openly  avow 
their  friendship  for  Rome.  "  We  are  unwilling  to  speak  harshly 
of  the  Romanists,"  say  these  divines.  "  Whatever  be  our 
private  differences  with  the  Roman  Catholics,  we  may  join  with 
them  in  condemning  Socinians,  Baptists,  Independents,  and  the 

1)  Lond.  Chr.  Obs.  5)  Oxf.  Tr.,  vol.  iv.  p.  1,  Eng.  cd., 

2)  See  Note  C.  and  Tr.  No.  80,  p.  62,  &c.,  and  Anc't 

3)  See  Brit.  Critic,  Oct.,  1839,  p.      Christianity,  vol.  i,  p.  405. 

337,  338.  G)  Palmer  on  the  Church,  vol.  i, 

4)  See  Newman  on  Romanism,     p.  237,  238. 
p.  288. 


)34 


LECT.    I.]  AEKOGANCE    OF   PRELACY.  17 

like.  But  God  forbid  that  we  should  ally  ourselves  with  the 
offspring  of  heresy  and  schism,  in  our  contest  with  any  of  the 
branches  of  the  holy  church  which  maintain  the  foundation, 
whatever  may  be  their  incidental  corruptions.'" 

Again  we  hear  them  say,  "  If  no  western  church  now-a-days 
is  quite  what  its  mother,  the  church  of  Rome,  used  to  be,  the 
catholic  church  in  England,  Scotland,  and  America,  (that  is, 
says  the  Tract,  the  protestant  episcopal  churches  of  those 
countries,)  surely  comes  nearest  to  her,  nay,  so  near,  that  they 
who  have  well  scanned  the  mother's  lineaments,  can  be  at  no 
loss  to  trace  her  features  in  her  child,"  &;c.^ 

Thus  do  they  cast  out  the  reformed  churches  as  repro 
bate,  as  having  committed  "  grievous  sin'"  —  as  "  inexcusable 
—  and  as  having  forsaken  Christ.^  Thus  do  they  boldly  ad- 
vance sentiments  which,  on  their  own  principles,  must  be  pro- 
nounced illiberal  —  uncatholic  —  and  dyed  in  the  gall  of  party 
spirit.^  And,  while  they  are  torn  with  intestine  divisions,  and 
pitted  against  each  other,  in  the  most  resolute  and  determined 
antagonism  ;  and  split  up  into  countless  and  sectarian  clans  ;  — 
they  assail  the  rights  of  all  other  churches,  and  proclaim  war 
against  all  Christendom  beside.''  For  to  use  the  language  of 
their  great  Coryphaeus,  "  in  the  English  church  may  be  found 
differences  as  great  as  those  which  separate  it  from  Greece 
or  Rome  —  Calvinism  and  arminianism,  latitudinarianism  and 
orthodoxy,  all  these,  sometimes  simply  such,  and  sometimes 
compounded  together  into  numberless  varieties  of  school,  *  *  * 
each  denouncing  all  the  rest  as  perilous,  if  not  fatal  errors."* 

Now  this  arrogant  claim  to  the  prerogatives,  and  this  assump- 
tion of  the  exclusive  character,  of  the  true  church,  Mr.  Palmer 
(in  his  great  work  on  the  church)  charges  on  the  papists  as 
"  impudent  pertinacity."  But  is  this  assumption  less  "  impu- 
dent pertinacity,"  when  made  by  prelatists,  as  it  is  by  this 
writer  himself,  on  their  behalf,  against  us?  Is  it  less  "  a  mon- 
strous fabrication,"  "  founded  on  false  premises,"  and  "  sustained 
by  ignorance  and  bigotry,"  when  uttered  by  the  voice  of  prelacy, 
than  when  it  comes  forth  in  some  Romish  bull  ?  Most  assur- 
edly not. 

These  church  principles  must  terminate  in   the  same   results 

1)  Oxf.  Tr.,  No.  25.  p.  6,  8,  9.  5)  See  Newman    on    Rom.,     p. 

2)  Tract  No.  153  of  the  Am.  Prot.     418.       Also   the   Bp.    of  Norwich  in 
Episcopal  Tract  See,  on  The  Ancient      Schism,  p.  508. 

Things  of  the  Catholic  Church,  p.  6.  6)  See  Oxf.  Tr.,  vol.  i.  p.  427, 

3)  Palmer  on  the  Church,  vol.  ii.      428  and  429. 

p.  368.  7)  Newman  as  above. 

4)  Do.  vol.  ii.  p.  366.  8)  See  vol.  i.  p.  238. 

3 


18  CHARITy    AND   PEACE    OVERTHROWN.  [lECT.    I. 

in  England  and  America,  which  have  ever  followed  them  in 
Italy  and  Spain,  in  Asia  and  in  Africa.  And  if  we  will  not 
sacrifice  every  thing  that  is  pure  in  the  truth  —  precious  in  the 
promises  —  spiritual  in  the  ordinances  —  ennobling  in  the  pre- 
cepts—  and  free,  elevating,  and  refining  in  the  spirit  —  of  the 
gospel ;  we  must  stand  fast  in  the  liberty  of  apostolic  Chris- 
tianity against  all  the  innovations  and  the  self-originated  policy 
of  ancient  and  modern  church  principles.'  Their  views,  these 
writers  inform  us,  and  those  understood  by  the  term  evangelical, 
are  as  wide  apart  as  socinianism  and  popery .'^ 

Further,  we  remark,  that  we  are  summoned  to  this  enterprise 
by  the  claims  of  charity  and  peace. ^ 

To  oppose  prelacy  is  not,  we  again  repeat,  to  oppose  episco- 
pacy ;  neither  is  it  to  impugn  the  character,  standing,  or  piety 
of  evangelical  episcopal  churches.  In  entering  our  protest 
against  the  anathematizing,  excommunicating  spirit  of  high- 
church  principles,  we  consider  prelatists  as  they  present  them- 
selves, in  their  self-chosen  garb,  "  stripped  of  those  better  parts 
of  their  system"  —  those  common  principles  of  Christianity, 
"which  are  our  inheritance  as  well  as  theirs;"  and  so  contem- 
plating them,  in  that  aspect  by  which  they  are  distinguished,  as 
prelatists,  it  is  surely  for  the  interests  of  peace  and  charity,  that 
their  unscriptural  and  unchristian  dogmas  should  be  exposed. 

A  defensive  war,  when  made  necessary  by  the  aggression  of 
others,  can  never  be  wrong  in  principle,  however  it  may  be 
tarnished  by  the  spirit  in  which  it  is  conducted.  On  the  contrary, 
it  is  only  by  such  a  war,  vigorously  and  successfully  prosecuted, 
that  peace  can  ever  be  restored,  and  prosperity  enjoyed.  There 
is,  in  such  circumstances,  no  alternative  between  war  and  liberty; 
or  submission  and  enslavement.  The  question  before  us  is,  con- 
formity to  prelacy,  or  the  justification  of  our  claims  to  that  in- 
heritance in  which  we  glory.  To  this  image  we  must  bow  down 
and  worship  ;  or  boldly  avouch  the  Lord  to  be  our  God,  and 
Jesus  Christ,  our  Redeemer.  While  prelacy  goes  forth  in  her 
present  crusade  against  the  immunities  and  privileges  of  all 
other  denominations,  there  is,  and  there  can  be,  neither  peace 
nor  charity.  By  demanding  uniformity,  prelacy  destroys  and 
prevents  unity.  By  branding  as  aliens  from  the  christian  com- 
monwealth, all  who  worship  God  in  a  manner  different  from  her 
—  prelacy  opposes  what  she  miscalls  schism,  by  what  the  Bible 
pronounces  to  be    truly  schism ;  for  illiberality,  bigotry,  intole- 

1)  See  Anc't  Christ'y,  passim.  3)  See  note  D. 

2)  Hook's  Call  to  Union,  p.  41. 


LECT.    T.]  PRELACY    SCHISMATICAL.  19 

ranee ;  what  are  these  but  the  very  essence  of  schism  ?  The 
rebuke  given  by  Campbell  to  the  fanaticism  of  Dadwell,  who 
makes  the  very  existence  of  Christianity  to  depend  on  prelacy,  is 
surely  not  too  strong. 

"  Arrogant  and  vain  man  !  what  are  you,  who  so  boldly  and 
avowedly  presume  to  foist  into  God's  covenant,  articles  of  your 
own  devising,  neither  expressed  nor  implied  in  his  words  ?  Do 
YOU  venture,  a  worm  of  the  earth  ?  Can  you  think  yourself 
warranted  to  stint  what  God  hath  not  stinted,  and,  following  the 
dictates  of  your  own  contracted  spirit,  enviously  to  limit  the 
bounty  of  the  Universal  Parent,  that  you  may  confine  to  a  party 
what  Christ  hath  freely  published  for  the  benefit  of  all  ?  Is  your 
eye  evil  because  he  is  good  ?  Shall  I  then  believe  that  God, 
like  deceitful  man,  speaketh  equivocally,  and  with  mental  re- 
servations ?  Shall  I  take  his  declaration  in  the  extent  wherein  he 
hath  expressly  given  it ;  or  as  you,  for  your  own  purpose,  have 
new  vamped,  and  corrected  it?  'Let  God  be  true,  and  every 
man  a  liar.'  You  would  pervert  the  plainest  declarations  of  the 
oracles  of  truth,  and,  instead  of  representing  Christ  as  the  au- 
thor of  a  divine  and  spiritual  religion,  as  the  great  benefactor  of 
human  kind,  exhibit  him  as  the  head  of  a  faction — your  party. "^ 

"Who,  then,  is  the  true  sectarian  ?  but  he  who  thus  denounces 
all,  as  sectaries,  who  are  not  of  his  sect  ?  Who  is  the  fanatic  ? 
if  not  he,  who  sees  fanaticism  every  where,  but  in  his  own  party 
spirit?  Who  is  the  enthusiast?  but  the  man  who  makes  a 
God  of  externals  and  non-essentials — while  he  finds  enthusiasm 
in  those  only,  who  are  in  earnest  respecting  the  grand  objects  of 
religion  ?  Where  is  the  schismatic  ?  if  not  among  those  who 
term  every  thing  schism,  which  does  not  accord  with  their  own 
opinions  ?'" 

How,  then,  can  there  prevail  peace  and  charity,  while  it  is 
still  a  question  whether  God  or  man  is  to  be  the  Lord  of  con- 
science—  and  the  principle  is  still  undetermined,  whether  man 
can  impose  as  a  fundamental  doctrine  of  Christianity,  what 
Christ  has  not  instituted  or  revealed  as  such  ?  How  can 
christians  walk  together  in  unity  of  heart,  or  of  profession, 
while  differing  on  these  first  elements  of  all  church  principles  ? 

There  must  be  controversy,  so  long  as  these  primal  and  mo- 
mentous questions  are  matters  of  dispute.  They  affect  the 
very  being,  and  much  more,  the  well-being,  of  the  church. 
They  involve,  in  their  decision,  the  whole  doctrine  of  charity. 
Their  determination  makes  peace  a  duty,  which  must  be  ful- 

1)  Lect.  on  Eccl.  Hist.  vol.  i.  p.  90,  91.  a)  See  Schism,  p.  341. 


20  THE    MEMORY    OF    OUR   FATHERS.  [LECT.   1. 

filled,  "  as  far  as  lieth  in  us," — or  separation  and  withdrawment, 
and  avowed  opposition,  as  imperative  on  all  who  would  faith- 
fully contend  for  Christ's  kingly  prerogative  and  crown.  Never, 
while  these  church  principles  of  prelatical  usurpation  are  cur- 
rent, can  the  prayer  of  Christ  be  visibly  fulfilled,  when  all  his 
churches  and  people  shall  be  seen  and  known  to  be  one,  being 
of  one  mind  and  of  one  heart,  and  preserving  amid  their  differ- 
ences of  views,  the  unity  of  the  Spirit  in  the  bonds  of  peace. 
Such  claims  were  rejected  by  the  English  reformers — by  all 
the  reformed  churches  —  and  by  the  greatest  divines  of  all 
ages.  They  are  in  violent  opposition  to  the  spirit  and  princi- 
ples of  the  gospel.  "Let  us,"  then,  as  said  the  Bishop  of 
Norwich,  in  his  late  charge  to  his  clergy,  "  let  us  abide  by  the 
faith  of  our  protestant  ancestors,  whose  object  it  was  to  pro- 
claim that  there  was  a  deeper  and  more  scriptural  unity,  than 
the  unity  of  ecclesiastical  organization,  or  of  ecclesiastical  de- 
tail,— I  mean  the  unity  of  christian  principle,  the  unity  of  the 
Spirit.'" 

Then  would  the  church  of  God  have  rest  and  be  edified ; 
displaying  on  the  banners  of  the  various  divisions  of  her  one 
sacramental  host,  the  glorious  motto  of  her  own  glorious  Au- 
gustine, "  In  things  essential,  unity — in  things  not  essential,  lib- 
erty— and  in  all  things,  charity.'"^ 

Till  that  happy  period  arrive,  which  may  God  in  his  mercy 
hasten,  forget  not  the  admonition  of  the  apostle — and  stand 
fast  in  that  liberty  wherewith  Christ  has  made  you  free. 

Finally,  brethren,  we  would  remark,  that  to  this  defensive  war- 
fare for  the  maintenance  and  preservation  of  our  spiritual  rights, 
we  are  imperatively  summoned  by  the  memory  of  our  fathers* 
*'  It  is  no  new  thing,  brethren,  that  has  happened  unto  us,"  as 
wrote  the  imprisoned  martyr  Ridley  to  his  brother  Bradford  ; 
"  for  this  was  always  the  clamor  of  the  wicked  bishops  and 
priests,  against  God's  true  prophets ;  the  temple  of  the  Lord, 
the  temple  of  the  Lord,  the  temple  of  the  Lord."^ 

There  has  thus,  as  it  plainly  appears,  ever  been  a  spiritual 
aristocracy,  which  would  make  a  monopoly  of  salvation,  con- 
fining it  to  Its  own  orders,  succession  and  gifts,  as  the  only  and 
exclusive  fountain  whence  it  might  be  obtained. 

Now,  to  that  form  of  government,  in  which  this  spirit  inheres, 
WE  may  be  said  to  possess  a  hereditary  antipathy.  The  history 
of  presbyterianism,  whether  we   look  to  its  ancient  defenders, 

1)  Charge  of  1838,  p.  22,  &c.  libertas,  in  omnibus  caritas. 

2   In  necessariis  unitas,  in  dubiis  3)  Letters  of  the  Martyrs,  p.  48. 


LECT.    I.]  THE    MEBIORY    OF    OUR    FATHERS.  21 

the  Culdees,  or  the  Waldenses  ; — or  to  the  churches  of  the 
reformation,  which,  with  the  single  exception  of  the  Enghsh, 
re-adopted  these  primitive  and  apostolical  principles;  —  or  to  its 
more  modern  defenders  in  Ireland  and  in  Scotland,  yea,  and  in 
this  country  prior  to  the  revolution  ;  —  presents  a  series  of  strug- 
gles, of  unexampled  severity  and  suffering,  to  preserve  the 
church,  on  the  one  hand,  from  the  grasp  of  Erastianism,  and  on 
the  other,  from  the  domineering  rule  of  spiritual  tyranny.  To 
surrender  the  church  to  the  one,  or  to  the  other,  and  to  give  it 
up  a  prey  either  to  the  civil,  or  to  the  ecclesiastical  powers, 
was  regarded  by  them  as  nothing  short  of  treason  to  their  Head 
and  King.  Acknowledging  no  man,  as  master  on  earth,  and 
recognizing  no  temporal  head  or  fountain  of  supremacy, — they 
placed  the  crown  upon  the  brow  of  Him  who  is  alone  worthy  to 
wear  it. 

"For  Christ's  crown  and  covenants," — for  his  word  and  wor- 
ship,— for  his  ordinances  in  their  entireness  and  in  their  purity ; — 
these  were  the  stirring  watchwords  by  which  they  were  rallied 
around  the  standard  of  the  truth ; — by  which  they  were  bound 
together  in  one  heart  and  in  one  mind — and  by  which  they  were 
sustained  in  the  loss  of  property,  of  liberty,  and  of  life  itself. 
The  headship  of  Christ,  and  the  liberty  and  spiritual  indepen- 
dence of  the  church  of  Christ,  these  were  the  high  principles, 
for  the  maintenance  of  which  they  endured  a  great  fight  of 
afflictions  ;  counted  not  their  lives  dear  unto  them  ;  and  poured 
out  their  blood  like  water. 

And  having,  at  a  cost  so  priceless — even  ages  of  endurance, 
ignominy,  oppression,  penury  and  danger  —  secured  to  us  the 
enjoyment  of  this  great  inheritance  —  are  we  not  called  upon, 
against  all  who  would  attempt  to  bring  us  into  bondage,  to  con- 
tend earnestly  for  that  liberty  wherewith  Christ  has  made  us  free 
and  wherein  we  stand  and  rejoice.  "And  because  the  world,  as  I 
perceive,  brethren,"  again  to  use  the  words  of  Ridley,  "  ceaseth 
not  to  play  his  pageant,  and  to  conspire  against  Christ  our  Sa- 
viour with  all  possible  force,"  eloquence,  learning  and  power, 
"  exalting  high  things  against  this  knowledge  of  God  and  this 
liberty  of  Christ,  let  us  join  hands  together  in  Christ;  and  if 
we  cannot  overthrow,  yet,  to  our  power,  and  as  much  as  in  us 
lieth,  let  us  shake  those  high  things,  not  with  carnal,  but  with 
spiritual  weapons."' 

And  now  to  conclude. — We  find  ourselves,  providentially,  by 
birth,  education,  or   from  conviction,  in  the  bosom  of  the  pres- 

1  Letters  of  Martyrs,  p.  33. 


22  THE    ANTICIPATED    RESULTS.  [lECT.    1. 

byterian  communion  —  a  body  identified  with  civil  and  religious 
freedom.  Many  of  us  hope  that  we  have  been  here  spiritually 
born  —  that  from  this  alma  mater  we  have  drawn  spiritual  nourish- 
ment, and  on  her  lap  been  nurtured  in  piety.  With  her,  too, 
are  associated  all  our  hopes  for  the  everlasting  happiness  of  the 
loved  and  the  gone.  Under  the  shadow  of  her  sanctuaries  lie  the 
buried  forms  of  our  venerated  sires,  and  our  beloved  offspring, 
whose  resurrection  to  glory  and  honor  must  stand  or  fall  with  the 
standing  or  falling  of  presbyterianism.  It  is  no  slight  or  trivial 
interest,  therefore,  which  demands  our  contemplation.  And  what 
we  say  to  you  is,  Abide  where  you  are,  neither  be  ye  moved 
or  shaken,  until  our  opponents  have  shown  cause  why  wesiiould 
escape  for  our  lives,  as  from  a  tottering  building  whose  founda- 
tion is  on  the  sand.  Till  then,  we  would  desire  to  help  you  to  a 
more  perfect  understanding  of  the  sure  foundation  upon  which 
our  church  is  built,  as  on  a  rock,  against  which  the  gates  of  hell 
shall  not  prevail ;  and  to  show  you  its  immovable  strength  by 
an  exhibition  of  the  utter  weakness  of  the  forces  with  which  her 
overthrow  is  attempted.  By  so  doing,  we  expect  to  brighten 
hope,  and  to  gild  the  pages  of  memory  ;  —  to  inspirit  the  heart  of 
the  onward  pilgrim  —  and  to  hallow  the  memories  of  the  depart- 
ed spirits  of  the  sainted  dead.  You  will  be  emboldened,  we 
trust,  to  venture  more  largely  for  a  church  so  adorned  with  all 
the  graces  of  heaven  ;  and  so  capable  of  enriching  you  with 
all  spiritual  blessings  in  Christ  Jesus.  You  will  bless  God  for 
having  led  you  into  her  sacred  temple,  and  to  tread  her  heavenly 
courts.  You  will  hold  more  assured  communion  with  the  church 
of  the  first-born  —  the  spirits  of  just  men  made  perfect,  as  know- 
ing, that  among  that  bright  and  shining  throng,  there  are  many 
who  here  mingled  their  voices  in  our  earthly  worship.  And  you 
will  more  tranquilly  approach  the  hour  when,  leaving  all  you 
love  below,  you  will  know  that  you  are  not  therefore  hurrying 
to  the  doom  of  the  schismatic,  or  to  the  purgatorial  limbo  which 
may  be  provided  by  God's  uncovenanted  mercy,  but  are  hasten- 
ing to  join  the  ransomed  throng  of  the  church  triumphant,  in 
that  temple  not  made  with  hands,  whose  Builder  and  Maker  is 
God.^ 

1)  See  Note  E. 


ADDITIONAL  NOTES  TO  LECTURE  FIRST. 


NOTE   A. 


As  it  may  still  be  thought  by  many,  that  we  have  very  laboriously  collected 
a  few  extravagant  expressions,  it  may  be  well  to  bring  together  in  a  note  some 
additional  illustrations  of  the  spirit  and  language  of  high-churchism.  Of  such 
specimens  we  have  a  large  collection  at  hand.  Let  us  first  rtake  a  few  ex- 
tracts, showing  the  sentiments  of  prelatists  regarding  the  churches  of  the 

Dutch  Reformed,  Presbyterians,  and  Independents,  conjointly. 

"  Either  ciiurch  organization  is  far  more  than  a  form,  or  it  does  not  call  for 
a  great  deal  of  lamentation.  There  are  no  forms  under  the  gospel.  Apos- 
tolical order  is  an  ethical  principle,  or  it  is  not  worth  much.  These  worthy 
Independents  were  deficient  in  an  inward  element  of  truth,  in  a  something 
mental,  moral,  spiritual,  mystical  —  or  they  had  no  great  loss,  considering  they 
were  in  unavoidable  ignorance.  They  were  not  altogether  right,  up  to  a  cer- 
tain point,  and  only  wanted  finishing.  They  were  not  dressed,  all  but  hat 
and  shoes.  Mr.  Ceswall  seems  to  consider  that  the  episcopal  form  is  the  lost 
thing  in  the  idea  of  a  church — and  therefore  a  presbyterian  or  independent 
body  may  be  considered  an  imperfect  sort  of  episcopacy.  Imperfect !  Is  a 
mouse  an  imperfect  kind  of  bat .'  Is  it  a  bat,  all  but  the  wings  ?  Could  we 
sew  wings  on  it,  and  make  it  a  bat .''  Did  all  the  swellings  of  an  ambitious 
heart  develope  the  frog  into  the  bull?  Could  it  'perfect  its  defective  organi- 
zation.''  So  it  is  with  independency  or  presbyterianism,  viewed  in  them- 
selves ;  as  forms,  they  are  as  distinct  from  the  church  as  one  kind  of  flesh  from 
another."     See  the  British  Critic  for  October,  1839,  page  337. 

"  Now,  taking  the  thirty-nine  articles  as  the  exactestform  of  apostolic  truth, 
still  we  must]  consider  that  the  quakers  and  Dutch  reformed  deviate  from 
them  as  far  as  the  Roman  catholics."     See  do.  p.  339. 

"  It  may  seem  harsh  thus  to  speak  of  '  episcopacy,'  and  '  episcopalians,' 
yet  we  hope  it  will  not  shock  any  one  if  we  say,  that  we  wish  the  words,  as 
denoting  an  opinion  and  its  maintainer,  never  had  been  invented.  They  have 
done  great  mischief  to  their  own  cause.  We  are  '  of  the  church,'  not '  of  the 
episcopal  church  ; '  our  own  bishops  are  not  merely  an  order  in  her  oiganiza- 
tion,  but  the  principle  of  her  contintmnce ;  and  to  call  ourselves  episcopalians  is 
to  imply  that  we  differ  from  the  mass  of  the  dissenters  mainly  in  churcfi  gov- 
ernment and  form,  in  a  matter  of  doctrine  merely,  not  of  fact;  whereas  the  dif- 
ference is,  that  we  are  here  and  they  there;  we  in  the  church,  and  they  out  of 
it."     See  do.  p.  341. 

Let  us  now  present  their  views  of 

The  Independent,  or  Congregational  Churches. 

In  special  reference  to  these,  it  may  be  sufficient  to  quote,  besides  what  is 
applicable  to  dissenters  generally,  as  intended  to  bear  particularly  on  them, 
the  following  quotation  from  a  letter  addressed  to  the  Rev.  William  H.  Cooper, 


24  NOTES    TO    LECTURE    I. 

of  Dublin,  Ireland,  by  the  Rev.  T.  D.  Gregg,  dated  Dublin,  28th  November, 
1839,  and  printed  in  the  newspapers  generally.* 

He  addresses  him  in  ridicule,  "  my  lord,"  because  he  claimed  to  be  a  chris- 
tian bishop. 

"  If,  like  the  excellent  primitive  Methodists,  you  acted  as  a  lay -helper  of  the 
church,  renounced  all  titles  but  that  of  *  Mr.  W.  H.  Cooper,  preacher  of  the 
gospel,'  'expounder  of  gospel  truths,'  or  'evangelist,'  it  would  be  quite  a 
different  matter.  Even  though  you  were  irregular,  1  should  consider  that  tlien 
there  was  no  place  for  ridicule — nay,  I  should  respect  your  liumble  zeal.  But 
to  announce  yourself  as  'reverend,'  to  talk  of  your  'ordination,'  '  of  your 
administering  of  sacraments,'  and  rf  your  '  not  denying  the  right  hand  of 
fellowship  to  your  dear  episcopal  brethren  ' — this,  believe  me,  is  ridiculous. 
1  assure  you,  my  lord,  you  have  no  more  right  to  perform  pastoral  functions — 
no  more  riglitful  pastoral  authority — no  more  faculty  to  administer  sacraments, 
than  one  of  your  own  '  clergy  ' — the  Rev.  Miss  Blank,  an  excellent  relation 
of  mine  ;  or  than  my  other  excellent  friend,  who  was  lately  one  of  your  sect, 
but  who  having,  through  my  arguments,  abandoned  dissent,  is  now  an  attached 
member  of  the  holy  catholic  and  apostolic  church — the  one  fold  of  the  one 
shejjherd,  Jesus  Christ — Mr.  John  Hanley." 

In  reference  to  speaking  severely  of  the  Romish  church,  he  says  :  "  J  am 
consistent — I  should  not  be  esteemed  offensive.  It  is  at  once  insult  and  injury 
that  you,  supported  by  the  Rev.  Miss  Dobbs,  and  the  Rev.  Mrs.  Snobbs,  your 
'  clergy,'  take  the  liberty  of  using  such  language  as  you  have  used. 

"  Forgive  me  if  1  have  spoken  harshly  —  I  have  heard  some  say  that  you 
and  I  are  embarked  in  the  same  cause.  I  can  scarcely  think  so  ;  I  know  the 
mind  of  the  Roman  catholics,  and  I  know  this,  that  if  there  be  one  offence  in 
the  way  greater  than  another,  it  is  the  offence  that  arises  from  proteslant  sec 
tarianism,  while  it  is  with  the  very  arguments  of  independence  that  popery  is 
at  present  assailing  the  church.  You  say  that  Christ  has  made  your  commu- 
nities churches  ;  I  deny  it.  You  are  they  who  'separate  themselves,'  (Jude 
19.)  and  what  Christ  makes  you  is  '  sensual ' — '  not  having  the  spirit.' 

He  then  concludes  thus  :  "  With  respect  for  you  as  a  man,  love  as  a  chris- 
tian, but  with  thorough  contempt  for  your  Fungus  Episcopate — I  remain,  my 
lord,  very  seriously,  yours  in  Christ, 

"T.  D,  Gregg. 

"  Dullin,  28thA''ovember,  1839." 

Let  us  now  hear  their  opinion,  more  especially  of 

Presbyterians. 

In  a  Treatise  on  the  Church,  by  Edward  Barrick,  of  Trinity  College, 
Dublin,  published  in  Belfast,  in  1813,  and  for  years  past  offered  for  sale  in 
Londonderry,  it  is  said  :  "  We  must  recollect,  that  these  pretended  ministers 
who  officiate  in  the  meetnigs  of  Preshyterians,  &c.,  have  not  been  ordained  by 
the  bishops.  And  consequently,  as  I  have  already  demonstrated,  these  men 
have  not  been  sent  by  God  ;  and  therefore,  it  must  be  utterly  nnlaicful  to  attend 
their  viinistry.  For  how  can  we  hear  without  a  preacher,  and  how  can  they 
preach  unless  they  be  sent.^  The  Lord  forbids  us  to  hear  them,  because  '  he 
hath  not  sent  them,  and  therefore  they  shall  not  profit  this  people.'  To  hear, 
then,  in  sucli  a  case,  is  rebellion  against  God  and  utterly  unlaicful,  and  is  coun- 
tenancing them,  and  hardening  their  •presumption  and  daring  imposture."  ^.  146. 

He  quotes  the  following  sentence,  with  approbation,  from  Dr.  S.  Butt's 
Discourse  on  Churcli  Government:  "That  episcopacy  is  of  divine  right; 
that  to  separate  from  the  orthodox  bishops  is  schismatical ;  that  schism  is  a 
damnable  sin."     p.  327. 

In  another  passage  he  says  :  "  The  case  being  thus,  the  nonentity  of  these 
unhappy  peoples'  church  appears  upon  a  double  account ;  first,  as  wanting  a 
?ninistry,  and  second,  as  wanting  the  due  preaching  of  the  pure  Word,  and 

•  duoted  from  the  Belfast  Christian  Patriot,  of  December  6,  1839. 


NOTES    TO    LECTDRE    I.  25 

riirht  administration  of  the  sacraments.  So  that  the  difference  between  us 
and  this  people,  as  already  considered,  is  a  ministry  mid  no  ministry,  a  church 
and  no  church."* 

In  the  Oxford  Tracts,  vol.  i.  p.  2G4,  No.  3f!,  under  the  head  of  "  Account  of 
Religious  Sects,"  &c.,  the  second  division  includes,  "  Those  who  receive  and 
teach  a  part,  but  not  the  whole  of  the  trutli,  erring  in  respect  to  one  or  more 
FUNDAMENTAL  DOCTRINES.  Under  this  head  are  included  most  of  what  are 
called  '  Protestant  dissenters.'     The  chief  of  these  are — 

1.  Presbyterians,  so  called,  from  maintaining  the  validity  of  ordination  by 
Presbyters  or  elders  only  ;  in  other  words,  by  the  second  order  of  the  clergy, 
dispensing  with  and  superseding  the  first."  "  We  need  not  deny  to  the 
church  the  abstract  right,  (however  we  may  question  the  propriety.)  of  alter- 
ing its  own  constitution.  It  is  not  merely  because  episcopacy  is  a  better  or 
more  scriptural  form  than  preshyterianism,  (true  as  this  may  be  in  itself,)  that 
Episcopalians  are  right  and  Presbyterians  are  wrong,  but  because  the  presby- 
terian  ministers  have  assumed  a  power  which  was  never  intrusted  to  them. 
They  have  presumed  to  exercise  the  power  of  ordination,  and  to  perpetuate  a 
succession  of  ministers  without  having  received  a  commission  to  do  so."  Oxf. 
'J'r.  Vol.  i.  No.  13. 

It  will  only  further  be  necessary  to  quote  the  recent  and  very  explicit  views 
drawn  up  for  the  guidance  of  theological  students,  of  Mr.  Palmer,  in  his  Trea- 
tise on  the  Church,  vol.  i.  p.  574 — 577,  in  which,  with  the  most  cool  and  con- 
summate arrogance  of  bigotry,  there  is  the  most  daring  assertion  of  what  the 
true  facts  of  the  case  will  by  no  means  warrant. 

"  I  am  now  to  speak  of  the  presbyteiian  societies  in  Scotland,  and  examine 
their  claim  to  be  considered  a  part  of  the  christian  church. 

"  These  proceedings  being  annulled  on  the  restoration  of  Charles  II.,  the 
Church  of  Scotland  continued  till  1690,  to  be  subject  to  its  bishops,  like  all 
other  churches,  though  many  adherents  of  the  covenant  formed  conventicles, 
and  separated  themselves  from  the  church.  In  1690  this  party  of  dissenters 
obtained  the  support  of  the  civil  power,  (in  consequence  of  the  refusal  of  the 
bishops  to  acknowledge  King  William  II.)  and  under  their  influence  tlie  Scot- 
tish parliament  consummated  a  most  woful  schism,  abolishing  episcopacy, 
and  establishing  the  presbyterian  separatists  as  the  church  of  Scotland.  Thus 
the  bishops  and  clergy  were  deprived  of  their  estates  and  all  their  legal  rights, 
and  their  place  and  authority  was  usurped  by  others,  while  a  portion  of  the 
nation  fell  from  their  obedience,  and  united  themselves  to  the  new  establish- 
ment, which  afterwards  obtained  many  converts  by  the  same  persecution 
which  it  directed  against  the  church. 

"  Hence  it  would  be  a  great  mistake  to  suppose  that  the  question  between 
the  Presbyterians  and  the  church  was  merely  a  dispute  on  church  govern- 
ment— it  was  concerning  the  most  vital  principles  of  the  church's  unity  and 
authority.  The  Presbyterians  were  innovators  who  separated  themselves  from 
the  church,  because  they  judged  episcopacy  anti-christian,  and  thus  con- 
demned the  church  universal,  in  all  past  ages.  Their  opinion  was  erroneous  ; 
but  had  it  merely  extended  to  a  preference  of  the  presbyterian  form,  it  might 
have  been  in  some  degree  tolerated — it  would  not  have  cut  them  off  from  the 
church  of  Christ.  But  it  was  the  exaggeration  of  their  opinion,  their  separa- 
tion for  the  sake  of  their  opinion,  their  actual  rejection  of  the  authority  and 
communion  of  the  existing  successors  of  the  apostles  in  Scotland,  and  there- 
fore of  the  universal  church  in  all  ages,  that  marks  them  out  as  schismatical  ; 
and  all  the  temporal  enactments  and  powers  of  the  whole  world  could  not 
cure  this  fault,  nor  render  them  a  portion  of  the  church  of  Christ. 
If  a  party  of  schismatics  should  separate  themselves  from  the  church  of 
England,  and  should,  by  a  fortunate  combination  of  events,  be  able  to  effect 
the  temporal  overthrow  of  the  church,  and  their  own  establishment  by  the 
civil  powers,  this  would  surely  not  deprive  the  church  of  her  claim  to  the 
adherence  of  christians,  nor  cover  the  sins  of  those  who  assailed  and  de- 
spoiled her. 

"  This  appears  really  to  have  been  the  case  of  the  Scottish  church  and  the 

*  See  Presbvterianism  Defended,  Glasgow,  1839,  pngea  197,  198. 

4 


26  NOTES    TO    LECTURE    I. 

Presbyterians ;  and  tlierefore,  while  we  must  ever  deplore  the  condition  of 
Scotland,  and  must  earnestly  desire  that  the  people  may  be  re-united  in  reli- 
gious harmony,  it  is  impossible  for  us  to  close  our  eyes  on  the  origin  of  the 
presbyterian  establishment  in  that  country. 

"  With  regard  to  all  the  other  sects  in  Scotland,  which  have  seceded  from  the 
presbyterian  communities,  such  as  Glassite,  Sandcmanians,  Seceders,  Burgh- 
ers, Anti-Burghers,  Constitutional  Associate  Presbytery,  Relief  Kirk,  Scot- 
tish Baj)tists,  Bereans,  Independents,  &c. ;  the  same  observations  apply 
to  them  all.  Their  predecessors,  the  Presbyterians,  voluntarily  separated 
themselves  from  the  catholic  church  of  Christ,  and  they,  in  departing  from 
the  presbyterian  communion,  have  not  yet  returned  to  that  of  the  true  church. 
Consequently,  they  form  no  part  of  the  true  chuucu  of  Christ." 

Similar  are  the  sentiments  expressed  towards 

Baptists. 

The  Baptists,  under  the  general  head  of  dissenters,  have  already  been  dealt 
with  according  to  the  tender  mercies  of  these  high-church  expounders  of  the 
will  of  God.     It  will  not  be  necessary  therefore  to  enlarge. 

Mr.  Palmer,  on  the  Church,  vol.  i.  p.  266,  in  replying  to  the  objection  that 
the  Church  of  England  is  in  error  on  the  subject  of  baptism,  says  :  "  A  diffi- 
culty of  this  kind,  raised  by  a  mere  handful  of  professing  christians,  in  oppo- 
sition to  the  judgment  and  practice  of  the  church,  and  of  all  sects,  in  all  ages, 
from  the  beginning,  is  not  worthy  of  attention.  We  may  refuse  all  contro- 
versy on  the  subject,  for,  as  St.  Augustine  says,  '  Si  quid  horum  tota  per 
orbem  frequentat  ecclesia — quin  ita  faciendum  sit,  disputare,  insolentissimse 
insanife  est.'  In  fact,  there  cannot  be  a  more  certain  mark  of  heresy  and 
apostacy  from  Christ,  than  such  a  condemnation  of  what  the  church  in  all 
ages  has  received  and  approved.  If  infant  baptism  renders  our  churches  apos- 
tate, all  churches  must  have  been  so  for  many  ages,  and  therefore  the  church 
of  Christ  must  have  entirely  perished, contrary  to  the  promises  of  holy  scrip- 
ture." 

In  the  Oxford  Tracts,  vol.  i.  p.  265,  Baptists  are  ranked  among  those  who  err 
in  respect  to  "  fundamental  doctrines,"  and  are  further  declared  to  have 
"  departed  from  the  truth,  not  only  as  concerns  the  doctrine  of  the  laying  on 
of  hands,  but  also  as  concerns  the  doctrine  of  baptism,  and  other  of  the 
fundamental  doctrines,  according  to  St.  Paul." 

Nor  are  they  at  all  more  lenient  toward  the 

Methodists. 

This  large  body  of  Christians  have  lately  received  very  rough  handling  in 
the  British  Magazine,  and  other  high-church  courts  of  ecclesiastical  law.  In 
the  Oxford  Tracts,  vol.  i.  p.  265,  they  are  also  dignified  with  a  place  among 
those  who  "  err  in  one  or  more  fundamentals,"  and  are  thus  described  : 

"  Methodists  are  subdivided  into  an  immense  variety  of  sects — the  chief  are, 
Wesleyans,  Whitefieldians,  or  Lady  Huntington's  Ranters,  or  Primitive 
Methodists,  Briantes,  or  Bible  Christians,  Protestant  Methodists,  Tent  Metho- 
dists, lnde])endent  Methodists,  and  Killiamites. 

"  These  do  not  receive  or  teach  the  truth  respecting  the  doctrine  of  '  laying 
on  of  hands,'  which  St.  Paul  classes  among  the  fundamental  doctrines  of 
Christianity,  and  by  which  the  christian  ministry  receives  its  commission  and 
autiiority  to  administer  the  word  and  sacraments  For  they,  one  and  all, 
reject  the  first,  fi.  e.  the  apostolical,  or  as  we  now  call  it,  episcopal,)  order  of 
clergy,  who  exercised  the  rite  according  to  the  New  Testament,  and  without 
whom  there  is  no  warrant  from  scri])ture  for  believing  that  the  clergy  can  be 
appointed  or  tiie  sacraments  be  duly  administered." 

Mr.  Palmer,  on  the  church,  vol.  i.  p.  247,  says  :  "  The  Methodists  do 
NOT  pretend  to  BE  A  CHURCH  AT  ALL  J  but  Call  themselves  a  society  or 
association,  wliich  they  would  represent  to  be  united  to  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land, and  subsidiary  to  itn  ministrations." 


NOTES    TO    LECTURE    I.  27 

So  also  at  page  237,  honorable  mention  is  made  of  Methodists.  "  In  fine, 
we  use  the  name  of  catholic  as  appropriate  to  our  churches,  while  we  give 
other  titles  to  the  various  denominations  which  have  separated  from  us;  as 
Independents,  Quakers,  Swedenborgians,  Baptists,  Romanists  or  Papists, 
Huntingdonians,  Methodists,  Socinians,  Unitarians,  «fec.  None  of  these  com- 
munities dispute  with  us  the  possession  of  this  name  except  the  Romanists  ; 
and  their  impudent  pertinacity,  in  the  assumption  of  it,  induces  sometimes 
the  ignorant  or  the  indifferent  to  countenance  their  claim  in  some  degree." 

So,  also,  as  it  regards  the 

Lutherans  and  Reformed  Churches. 

Of  these  it  is  declared  by  Palmer  on  the  Church,  vol.  i.  p.  157,  "  The  socie- 
ties were  not  properly  churches. 

"  That  the  lutheran  and  calvinistic  were  not  properly  churches  of  Christ, 
I  argue  thus,"  &c.  See  do.  p.  383.  "  Several  theologians,  it  is  objected, even 
of  the  British  churches,  have  acknowledged  the  lutheran  and  reformed  to  be 
churches  of  Christ. 

"  Answer.  I  admit  that  this  opinion  has  been  held  by  some  writers  ;  but 
they  seem  to  have  been  influenced  by  the  notion,  that  it  was  necessary  for  the 
justification  of  both  the  protestant  and  British  churches.  However,  scarcely 
any  theologian  affirmed  these  foreign  communities  were  perfect  in  all  respects, 
according  to  the  institution  of  Christ ;  and  most  of  those  who  give  them  the 
title  of  churches,  do  so  in  a  general  sense,  not  meaning  that  they  are  churches 
in  the  strict  sense  of  the  term."     See  do.  p.  397. 

"  Of  these  communities,  whether  collectively  or  individually  considered,  1 
affirm,  that  they  are  no  part  of  the  church  of  Christ.  This  ques- 
tion has  been  recently  so  well  treated  by  many  able  writers,  that  very  little 
need  be  said  on  the  subject."     See  do.  p.  399. 

And  as  regards  the 

Dissenters  Generally. 

In  regard  to  all  other  denominations  who,  living  in  the  same  country  with 
Episcopalians,  are  on  that  account  arrogantly  styled  dissenters,  though  they 
have  no  relation  whatever  to  the  episcopal  cliurch,  other  than  as  churches  of 
Christ,  mucii  is  said.  This  term,  as  we  shall  show,  is  one  applied  even  in 
America. 

"  They  are  human  societies.  The  will  of  man  makes  them,  regulates  them, 
unmakes  them.  They  are,  in  a  word,  purely  voluntary  associations,  and 
therefore  cannot  be  any  part  of  that  church  which  is  formed  by  the  divine 
command,  and  by  means  instituted  by  God,  and  from  which  man  cannot  sep- 
arate without  most  grievous  sin."     See  do.  p.  407. 

"  It  is  clear,  then,  that  the  principle  of  division  is  a  principle  of  dissent,  and 
therefore  their  community  cannot  form  any  portion  of  the  church  of  Christ." 
See  do.  p.  407. 

"  And  as  every  officer  of  a  voluntary  association  or  club,  derives  his  com- 
mission entirely  from  those  who  create  him,  so  the  dissenting  minister  is  com- 
missioned to  preach  the  gospel,  not  by  God,  but  by  man.  He  is  the  minister  of 
man  only,  and  therefore  the  dissenting  communities  being  destitute  of  a  true 
ministry,  which  is  essential  to  the  church,  are  not  churches  of  Christ.  I  shall 
add  nothing  in  a  case  so  easy  and  clear."     See  do.  p.  414. 

"  Therefore,  their  separation  from  the  Church  of  England  was  founded,  not 
only  in  schism,  but  in  heresy,  and  this  being  the  case,  they  could  not  have 
been  any  part  of  the  church  of  Christ,  nor  were  they  capable  of  forming 
christian  churches."  p.  403.     See  also  page  402. 

"  They  and  their  generations  are  as  the  heathen  ;  and  though  wo 
may  have  reason  to  believe  that  many  of  their  descendants  are  not  obstinate 
in  their  errors,  still  it  seems  to  me  that  we  are  not  warranted  in  affir.m- 

ING    ABSOLUTELY    THAT    THEY    CAN    BE    SAVED."       See  do.  p.  110. ■ 

The  present  feeling  of  liberality  towards  Presbyterians  and  others,  is  thus 


28  NOTES    TO    LECTURE    I. 

rebuked  in  the  Oxford  Tracts,  vol.  i.  p.  599 :  "  Do  not  hover  about  our  ancient 
home,  the  home  of  Cyprian  and  Athanasius,  without  the  heart  to  take  u))  our 
abode  in  it,  yet  afraid  to  quit  tiie  sigiit  of  it;  boasting  of  our  episcopacy,  yet 
unwilling  to  condemn  separation  ;  claiming  a  descent  from  the  apostles,  yet 
doubting  of  the  gifts  attending  it,  and  trying  to  extend  the  limits  of  the  church 
for  tiie  admission  of  Wesleyans  and  Presbyterians,  while  we  profess  to  be 
exclusively  primitive.  Alas,  is  not  this  to  witness  against  ourselves,  like 
coward  sinners  who  hope  to  save  the  world,  without  giving  up  God's  service  !" 

"  Wlien  1  say  that  dissent  is  a  sin,  I  by  no  means  thereby  imply,  that  for 
that  reason  every  dissenter  is  at  once  and  necessarily  a  sinner.  To  say  that  a 
particular  thing  is  a  sin,  is  very  different  frem  saying  that  every  one  who  does 
it  is  a  sinner."     See  do.  p.  355. 

"  1  must  observe,  then,"  says  Mr.  Dodsworth  on  Romanism  and  Dissent,  p. 
14,  •'  that  liiere  is  often  a  kind  of  levity  indulged  in,  when  speaking  on  the 
subject  of  dissent,  which  conveys  the  idea  that  it  is  a  very  light  and  trivial 
matter.  If  a  man  ventures  to  speak  of  it  as  an  evil,  he  is  met  by  a  smile  at 
his  supposed  bigotry  or  simplicity.  Now,  if  dissent  is  indeed,  as  I  think  has 
been  shown,  a  breach  of  unity  in  the  cliurch — if  it  bo  that  which  we  are 
taught  to  pray  against  in  the  same  sentence  with  '  false  doctrine  and  heresy,' 
witli  '  hardness  of  heart,  and  contempt  of  God'.s  word  and  commandments,' — 
then  it  is  a  sin  ;  and  then  to  make  light  of  it,  is  to  subject  ourselves  to  a  re- 
proof which  we  should  not  willingly  incur — for  '  fools  make  a  mock  of  sin.' 
And  then  we  should  feel  bound  in  charity  to  others  who  have  been  drawn 
away  from  us,  in  meekness  and  gentleness  to  warn  tliem  of  their  danger,  be- 
cause we  must  not  '  suffer  sin  upon  a  brother.'  " 

"  So  we  do  not  exhort  you  to  abstain  from  going  to  those  assemblies  because 
we  attach  any  inherent  virtue  to  our  own  ceremonies  above  theirs  ;  but  be- 
cause, by  so  doing,  you  lend  your  countenance  to  that  which  the  Scriptures 
■pronounce  to  be  sinful."     See  do.  p.  15. 

"  I  need  scarcely  add,  therefore,  that  in  order  to  obey  the  injunction  in  the 
text,  you  must  refrain  from  ever  sanctioning  by  your  presence  the  assemblies 
of  those  whose  standing  is  one  of  rebellion  against  the  Lord  and  his  church. 
If  schism  is  sin,  then  to  be  present  where  it  is  practised  cannot  be  without 
culpability."     See  do.  p.  1(5. 

"  But  we  must  judge  of  dissent,  not  in  reference  to  individual  teachers,  but 
as  a  system  ;  and  we  may  easily  see,  both  from  fact  and  reason,  that  its  ten- 
dency is  to  infidelitij."     See  do.  p.  11 . 

Further,  in  the  Oxford  Tracts,  vol.  i.  pp.  355,  356,  it  is  said  :  "  For  when  a 
man  thinks  the  church  unscriptural,  he  has  good  reason  for  leaving  it,  and  is 
(what  1  have  called  above)  a  conscientious  dissenter  ;  though  at  the  same  time 
1  am  bound  to  say,  I  think  his  conscience  a  very  erroneous  one,  which  leads 
him  to  consider  the  church  as  unscriptural ;  and  while  I  allow  him  to  be  con- 
scicntious,  in  one  sense  of  the  word,  yet  I  also  think  him  to  be  heretical — ^just 
as  those  who,  (as  our  Lord  foretold.)  thought  when  they  persecuted  the  Apostles 
'they  did  God  service,'  were  wrong,  not  in  that  they  obeyed  their  conscience, 
but  because  they  had  not  a  more  enlightened  conscience.  '  The  light  that  is 
in'  a  merely  conscientious  dissenter,  is  what  Christ  has  called  'darkness.'  " 

"  Christ  has  appointed  the  church  as  the  only  way  unto  eternal  life.  We 
read  at  tiie  first  that  the  Lord  added  daily  to  the  church  such  as  should  be 
saved  ;  and  what  was  then  done  daily  hath  been  done  since  continually. 
Christ  never  appointed  two  ways  to  heaven;  nor  did  he  build  a  church  to 
save  some,  and  make  another  institution  for  other  men's  salvation.  '  Tliere  is 
no  other  name  given  under  heaven  whereby  we  must  be  saved,  but  the  name 
of  Jesus,'  and  that  is  no  otherwise  given  under  heaven  than  in  the  church." 
See  do.  p.  3G1. 

These  extracts,  in  addition  to  many  more  which  shall  be  introduced  in  the 
course  of  the  work,  and  which  we  could  most  easily  multiply,  may  suffice  to 
lead  all  our  readers  to  appreciate  the  urgency  of  that  demand  which  calls  upon 
us  to  examine  these  arrogant  pretensions. 


NOTES    TO    LECTURE    I.  29 


NOTE  B. 


The  meaning  of  this  term,  high  churcii,  is  given  by  Dr.  Rioe.  "  Some- 
body," says  lie,*  "  lias  putforth  a  long  story  about  Bishop  Horsley's  notions  on 
this  subject.  But  all  this  is  as  far  from  the  subject,  as  it  is  discussed  in  this 
country,  as  we  are  from  being  high  churchmen  ourselves.  There  are  men 
in  England,  who  maintain  that  the  clergy  are  entirely  dependent  on  the  State, 
and  derive  all  their  clerical  authority  from  the  laws  of  the  land — while  others 
hold  that,  apart  from  the  civil  power,  and  all  acts  of  the  government  in  relation 
to  the  church,  the  ministers  of  religion  have  power  and  authority  derived 
from  the  appointment  of  Christ.  The  latter  of  these,  in  Bishop  Horsley's 
sense  of  the  term,  are  high,  and  the  former,  lotc  churchmen.  But  this  has  no 
connexion  whatever  with  any  controversy  in  this  country.  The  church  here 
derives  nothing  from  the  State  ;  in  all  her  branches  she  is  entirely  separate 
and  independent.  In  Bishop  H.'s  sense,  we  are  all  high  churchmen.  But 
when  we  use  the  term,  as  expressive  of  the  principles  to  which  we  never  can 
be  reconciled,  we  mean  a  man,  who  holds  that  all  spiritual  power  is  vested  in 
him  ;  that  he  is  a  substitute  for  Christ's  person  on  earth  ;  that  he  belongs  to 
an  order,  whose  official  prerogative  it  is  to  come  between  God  and  man  ;  to 
declare  authoritatively  the  divine  will  to  his  fellow  men,  and  to  bind  the 
source  of  all  mercy  and  grace  to  the  performance  of  his  own  covenant  engage- 
ments, and  thus  give  to  man  the  assurance  of  salvation.  And  who  adds  to  all 
these  monstrous  claims,  the  assumption,  that  all  who  differ  from  him  in  these 
particulars,  and  separate  from  his  communion,  are  out  of  the  pale  of  the 
church,  and  destitute  of  all  warrant  to  hope  for  heaven.  These  are  the  princi- 
ples against  which  we  are  pledged  to  wage  war  as  long  as  Vk'e  live.  But  at 
the  same  time,  we  delight  to  call  every  humble,  pious  episcopalian,  brother, 
and  to  cherish  towards  him  feelings  of  fraternal  kindness." 

We  might  make  a  further  reference  to  a  treatise  written  expressly  in  de- 
fence of  moderate,  or  low  church  men,  entitled,  "A  Vindication  of  the  Princi- 
ples and  Practices  of  the  iVIoderate  Divines  and  Laity  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land," by  the  Rev.  Edward  Pierce,  Rectorin  Northampton.  Lond.,  Ifi82,p.  410, 
p.  80.  The  author  shows  that  they  were  distinguished  from  the  high  church 
by  all  their  practices  and  opinions,  which  he  fully  justifies.  At  p.  52,  he 
urges  moderateism  towards  dissenters,  "  because  we  agree  not  only  in  funda- 
mentals of  religion  and  government, but  in  the  necessary  adjuncts  of  worship," 
«&c.     See  in  Philad.  Lib.  No.  937,  Miscellanies,  vol.  xvii. 

See  this  distinction  used  also  by. Prof  Powell,  in  his  Traditions  Unveiled, 
p.  5,  in  reference  to  that  party  in  the  church,  "  the  well-known  and  old 
established  section  of  the  church  commonly  designated  as  the  high-church 
party." 

NOTE  C. 

In  his  Review  of  Bishop  Ravenscroft's  Vindication  and  Defence,  Dr.  Rice 
remarks  :  '•  It  was  indeed  the  opinion  of  some,t  that  we  had  undertaken  a 
work  of  gratuitous  labor  and  trouble  ;  that  the  extravagant  pretensions  of 
Bishop  R.  might  be  left  to  sink  at  once  into  the  oblivion  to  which,  it  was 
believed,  they  are  destined.  We  thought  differently.  It  has  for  some  time 
appeared  obvious  to  us,  that  there  is  growing  up  a  spirit  in  tiiis  country,  which 
seeks  for  marks  of  distinction  between  itself  and  the  mass  of  the  people.  As 
infidelity  is  out  of  fashion,  and  unitarianism  is  not  popular  to  the  south, 
there  is  a  great  demand,  among  people  of  a  certain  sort,  (to  use  a  plirase  cur- 
rent among  all  good  cavaliers  ever  since  the  "  merry  days  of  King  Charles,") 
for  a  "  religion  fit  for  a  gentleman."  There  is,  also,  among  many  of  our 
republicans,  a  passion  for  ceremony,  for  pomp  and  show  in  religious  worship. 
Others,  moreover,  too  indolent,  too  much  devoted  to  the  world  to  secure  scrip- 

*  Evang.  and  Lit.  Magazine,  vol.  ix  p.  635. 
t  Evang.  and  Lit.  Mag.  vol.  ix.  p.  368  and  p.  436. 


30  NOTES    TO    LECTURE    I. 

tural  evidences  of  their  being  in  a  state  of  salvation,  are  willing  enough  to 
look  to  their  priests  for  assurance.  Higii-church  notions,  then,  do  not  sink 
under  tlie  influence  of  public  opinion.  It  is  necessary  to  make  efforts  to  pull 
them  down.  The  interests  of  tiie  church  and  of  tlie  country  require  it. 
Under  this  conviction,  we  acted  according  to  our  sense  of  duty,  and  endeav- 
ored to  sliow  that  tiie  claims  of  this  bishop  could  not  be  sustained  either  by 
reason  or  scripture."  "  But  we  will  say,  that  when  high-church  principles 
were  first  broached  among  us,  we  thought  that  it  was  perfectly  a  work  of 
supererogation  to  undertake  to  oppose  them  ;  that  in  this  counlrij  their  very 
extravagance,  their  opposition  to  the  genius  of  all  our  political  institutions, 
their  obvious  tendencies,  would  at  once  put  them  down.  But  they  are  grow- 
ing. Their  influence  is  felt  even  by  evangelical  men.  Young  preachers,  who 
turned  out  warm  hearted  and  liberal,  are  gradually  screwed  up  to  notions  and 
feelings  high  enough  to  please  a  diocesan  bishop.  We  see  these  things  and 
lament  them.  It  is  our  duty  to  expose  the  error,  and  give  the  warning.  And 
as  God  may  give  us  grace  to  be  faithful,  none  within  the  sphere  of  our  labors 
shall  go  unwarned." 


NOTE   D. 

That  we  are  thus  required  by  the  call  of  charity  to  examine  and  discuss  this 
subject,  is  taught  us  by  one  of  its  most  recent  advocates.  "  The  only  ques- 
tion," says  Mr.  Percival,  "  then  is,  whether  the  episcopal  (i.  e.  prelatical) 
scheme  is  ^rwe;  if  so,  charity  REquiKEs  that  we  should  teach  it,  and  forbids 
our  keeping  it  back."  "  The  exclusiveness  of  that  whicli  professes  to  be  an 
article  of  this  one  faith,  aflbrds  a  ■prima  facie  probability*  of  its  being  a  genu- 
ine article  of  that  one  faith."  "Believing,"  he  adds,  "the  doctrine  of  the 
apostolical  succession  to  be  catholic  and  scriptural,  1  will  never  so  far  betray 
the  cause  of  truth  as  to  surrender  it  to  the  sole  use  of  the  erroneous  papists."! 
"  They  who  believe  this  doctrine  to  be  true,  are  only  acting  faithfully  to  God 
and  to  his  people,  when  they  calmly  vindicate  and  bear  witness  to  the  truth. "t 

And,  once  more,  in  the  very  spirit  of  fabulous  invention,  this  writer  adds 
to  the  assertion,  that  all  the  churches  during  the  apostles'  time  were  epis- 
copalian;  "that,  until  the  presbyterian  scheme  was  invented  in  the  sixteenth 
century,  it  had  always  been  understood  to  be  our  Lord's  intention  that  the 
church  should  continue  episcopalian  (i.  e.  prelatic)  until  his  return."  § 

"  Now  when,"  as  one  of  tlieir  ownselves  has  said,  "  when  a  religious  sys- 
tem condemns  us  by  name,  and  pronounces  sentence  concerning  our  eternal 
state  in  so  decided  a  tone,  and  that  simply  because  we  dis.sent  irom  some  of 
its  tenets,  we  not  only  think  we  have  a  right  to  defend  ourselves  and  our 
religion,  but  consider  it  our  bounden  duty  to  examine  the  grounds  on  which  a 
system  of  such  pretension  rests,  and  honestly,  though  quietly,  to  avow  our 
reasons  for  rejecting  it."  || 


NOTE  E. 

The  Rev.  Dr.  Muir,  in  his  Sermon  in  Commemoration  of  the  General  As- 
.sembly  of  1G38,  (Glasgow,  1838,  p.  18—20,)  thus  eloquently  alludes  to  the 
fathers  of  the  church  of  Scotland  :  "That  for  exciting  our  gratitude,  as  on 
such  a  day  as  this,  we  may  well  cherish  the  remembrance  of  the  men  who 
were  instrumental  in  procuring,  and  then  transmitting  the  privileges  of  our 
protestantism.  Tlie  zeal  of  David,  the  man  after  God's  own  heart,  was  truly 
exemplified  in  their  piety,  and  wisdom,  and  sufferings,  and  constancy.  Their 
strength  of  character  and  decision  was  great  Their  devotion  to  the  cause  of 
Christ  was  greater.     Persecuted  in  their  adherence  to   that  cause,  they  still 

•  On  Ap.  Succ.  p.  38.  f  P.  40.  J  P.  52.  $  P.  61. 

II  The  Old  Paths,  by  the  Rov.  Aloiander  McCauI,  D.  D.,  of  Trinity  College,  Dublin.  Lon- 
don, 1837,  p.  3,  No.  1. 


NOTES    TO    LECTURE    I.  31 

endured.  Thwarted  in  their  measures,  at  once  religious  and  patriotic,  they 
planned  anew.  Withstood  in  their  most  reasonable  demands,  they  held  fast 
by  tlieir  claims,  and  persevered. 

"  And  while,  on  reviewing  the  glorious  deliverance  achieved  from  anti- 
christ, from  tiie  monstrous  evils  of  the  mercenary  and  superstitious  priesthood 
of  Rome,  of  an  interdicted  reason,  and  a  banished  Bible, — while,  on  reviewing 
that  struggle  with  '  the  man  of  sin,'  which  broke  the  chain  of  the  papacy  in 
Scotland,  we  trace  the  might  of  the  contest  and  the  victory  to  the  Lord  of 
Hosts,  and  give  him  the  honor  and  the  praise,  yet  ought  we  not  to  remember 
'  the  noble  army  of  the  martyrs  ^ ' — with  grateful  sentiments  ought  we  not  to 
think  and  speak  of  '  the  cloud  of  witnesses  '  that  endured,  and  labored,  and 
died,  in  the  cause  of  truth;  and  to  hold  up  their  memories,  embalmed  in  sacred 
gratitude ,  before  ourselves  and  our  children  ?  There  was  Hamilton ,  distinguished 
by  learning  as  well  as  high  birth,  devoted  from  his  youth  to  God,  and  whose 
zeal  for  the  pure  faith,  which  he  drank  at  the  feet  of  Luther  and  Melancthon, 
was  not  quenched  on  earth  but  with  his  blood.  There  was  Wishart,  skilled  al- 
most equally  in  divine  and  human  sciences,  whose  sermons  penetrated  the  most 
hardened,  and  melted  them  into  tears, — who  braved  the  pestilence  to  carry  the 
message  of  divine  grace  to  his  ignorant  and  perishing  countrymen, — whose 
devout  wrestlings  for  sinners  had  somewhat  of  angelic  fervors  in  them,  and 
whose  martyr's  crown  shone  amid  the  flame  of  persecution  as  gloriously  as 
that  of  any  of  the  early  christians  themselves.  IPhere  was  Knox,  the  apos- 
tolic messenger  of  the  reformation,  peculiarly  fitted,  by  the  spirit  of  wisdom 
and  power,  for  his  extraordinary  work;  and  whose  devotedness  to  the  cause 
of  Christ,  and  eloquence,  and  compassion  for  the  souls  of  men,  and  warmth 
of  aflection,  were  not  less  memorable  tlian  the  boldness  of  character  which 
earned  for  him  the  well-known  encomium  at  his  grave  :  "  There  lies  a  man 
who  never  feared  the  face  of  man."  Names  these  are,  not  ofien  rehearsed 
from  the  pulpit ;  and,  doubtless,  liaving  scripture  names,  examples  of  piety 
and  zeal  so  numerous,  how  seldom  need  we  go  from  the  Bible  record  to  seek 
the  pattern  and  incentive  to  righteousness  !  But,  on  this  day,  and  valuing  the 
privileges  of  our  church,  and  desirous  to  see  them  perpetuated  and  extended, 
shall  we  not  recall  the  memory  of  the  great  men  who  planted  and  watered  the 
tree  of  our  privileges  with  tlieir  very  blood  ?  and  shall  we  not  consider  that 
those  now  named,  were  followed  by  a  multitude  of  other  religious  patriots,  in 
having  whom  any  country  miglit  deem  itself  honored  ?  And  surely  we  can- 
not read  of  such  men  as  the  Melvilles,  and  Bruce,  and  Welch,  and  Henderscm, 
and  Gillespie,  and  Rutherford,  and  more  of  the  like  sainted  character,  with- 
out blessing  God  for  his  goodness,  in  having  raised  up  those  who  were  so 
fully  qualified,  both  for  establishing  and  adorning  our  Zion.  They  who  thus 
wrought  at  the  second  reformation  (as  it  is  called)  were  indued,  even  as 
they  needed,  with  qualities  both  of  mind  and  heart,  similar  to  what  had  been 
requisite  at  the  first.  The  work  of  the  first  had  been  marred  and  shaken  by 
the  renewed  attempts  of  popery  to  gain,  under  the  disguise  of  improving  and 
beautifying  the  services  of  the  church,  a  lodgment  once  more  in  Scotland. 
Who  shall  doubt  this  who  have  traced  the  painful  steps  of  our  history,  from 
the  opening  of  the  seventeenth  century,  onwards  to  its  thirty-eighth  year .'' 

"  In  Scotland,  these  persecutions  were  peculiarly  severe*  and  aggravated. 
From  the  opening  of  the  tragedy  with  the  scarcely  legalized  murder  of  the 
Marquis  of  Argyle,  to  the  closing  of  it  in  the  death  of  the  zealous  Renwick, 
an  innumerable  host  sealed  with  their  blood,  their  testimony  to  the  truth  of 
presbyterian  reformation  principles.  Their  sufferings  and  privations  were  of 
the  severest  kind,  and  of  every  possible  form  which  the  cruelty  of  man  could 
invent.  Neither  were  the  martyrs  confined  to  the  man  of  robust  constitution 
and  masculine  mind ;  but  delicate  and  helpless  females  were  found  fear- 
facing  their  blood-thirsty  persecutors,  preferring  to  die  with  their  children  in 
lessly  their  arms,  rather  than  sacrifice  their  religious  liberty.  '  God  and  our 
country  '  was  the  watchword, — the  governing  sentiment  which  filled  the 
hearts  of  these  patriotic  sufferers.  But,  though  driven  from  their  homes,  and 
forced  to  seek  a  hiding-place  in  the  lone  glen  or  rocky  cavern,  the  presence  of 

*  Sketch  of  Hist,  and  Princ.  of  the  Picsb.  Ch.  in  England.    London,  1810,  p.  17  and  p.  26. 


32  NOTES    TO    LECTURE    I. 

the  covenant  sustained  and  cheered  their  souls  ;  and  it  was  then  they  found 
the  vision  of  Moses  in  Mount  Horeb,  afFectingly  applicable  to  their  circum- 
stances, and  adopted  the  burning  bush  in  the  wilderness,  as  a  fit  emblem  of 
the  state  of  the  church — enveloped  in  the  flames  of  a  fiery  persecution,  yet 
not  consumed,  for  the  Lord  was  in  the  midst  of  her. 

"  Ye3 — tliough  the  sceptic's  tongue  derido 
Those  martyrs  who  for  conscience  died  ; 
Tlioiigh  modish  history  slight  tlieir  fame, 
And  sneering  courtiers  hoot  the  name 
Of  men,  who  dared  alone  be  free 
Amidst  a  nation's  slavery  : 
Yet  Ion;;  for  tliem  the  poet's  lyre 
Sliail  wake  its  notes  of  heavenly  fire. 

"  Their  names  shall  nerve  the  patriot's  hand, 
Upraised  to  save  a  sinking  land; 
And  piety  shall  learn  to  burn 
With  holier  transports  o'er  their  urn." 


LECTURE  II. 


THE    TRIBUNAL,    BY    WHICH    THIS    PRELATICAL    DOCTRINE    OF  APOSTOL- 
ICAL   SUCCESSION    MUST    BE    ADJUDICATED. 

While  the  nature  of  man  is  so  constituted,  as  to  dispose 
him  to  submit  to  that  authority  which  is  true  and  valid,  it  also 
compels  him  to  resist  that  which  is  unlawful.  Thus,  when  our 
Saviour  had  entered  upon  his  public  ministry,  and  had  mani- 
fested his  design  to  interfere  with  the  established  usages  and 
opinions  of  the  Jews,  they  came  unto  him,  as  he  was  teaching 
in  the  temple,  and  said,  "  by  what  authority  doest  thou  these 
things?  —  who  gave  thee  this  authority?"  (Math.  21,  23.) 
The  propriety  and  reasonableness  of  such  an  inquiry,  (while,  in 
view  of  the  captious  manner  in  which  it  was,  at  this  time,  pro- 
posed, Christ  gave  only  an  indirect  and  parabolic  answer,)  — 
our  Saviour  has  fully  allowed,  by  the  frequent  appeals  which  he, 
at  other  times,  makes  to  the  evidences  of  his  divine  mission. 

When,  therefore,  any  body  of  men  assume  to  themselves  the 
exclusive  possession  of  the  gifts  and  calling  of  God ;  —  declare 
themselves  to  be  the  one  and  only  true  church  of  Christ,  out 
of  which  there  is  no  covenanted  salvation  ;  and  pronounce  a 
sentence  of  excommunication,  and  of  withering  anathema,  upon 
all  other  denominations,  who  call  themselves  christian  ;  —  un- 
churching their  churches ;  deposing  their  ministers  ;  confound- 
ing their  orders ;  protesting,  as  forgeries,  their  commissions ; 
despoiling  of  all  virtue  their  most  solemn  ordinances ;  and 
thus  casting  them  out  of  the  temple,  as  intruders; — we  seri- 
ously put  to  them  the  question,  which  was  arrogantly  addressed 
to  Christ,  and  ask,  "  by  what  authority  doest  thou  these 
things,  and  who  gave  thee  this  authority  ?  "  And,  since  these 
claims  are  either  founded  on  assured  divine  sanctions,  and  are, 
5 


34  WHAT    IS    THE    RULE  OF  JUDGMENT.  [lECT.  II. 

therefore,  to  be  most  humbly  and  imphcitly  allowed ;  or  are 
based  upon  the  prescriptions  of  uninspireu  and  fallible  men,  and 
are,  in  this  case,  mere  assumptions,  involving  the  deepest  crim- 
inahty ;  it  will  not  do  for  their  abettors,  to  draw  tliemselves 
up  in  lordly  dignity,  and  with  the  declaration  that  the  ground 
of  such  authority  is  too  notorious  to  be  denied,'  violate  the 
spirit  while  adopting  the  language  of  our  Saviour,  when  he  said, 
"  neither  tell  T  you  by  what  authority  1  do  these  things." 

To  this  question,  therefore,  which  we  propound  in  all  sin- 
cerity and  honesty  of  purpose,  and  with  an  unfeigned  de- 
sire to  know  and  obey  the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus,  that  in  all 
things  by  His  grace  given  unto  us,  we  may  please  God,  and 
walk  obediently  in  his  statutes  and  ordinances,  —  we  must  de- 
mand a  reply.  And  as  we  are  not  willing  to  abandon  that  posi- 
tion which  we  have  taken,  and  as  we  believe,  by  the  guidance 
of  holy  Scripture,  —  we  cannot  bow  down  to  these  masters,  or 
serve  them,  until  they  have  duly  authenticated  the  divine  war- 
rant of  their  supremacy. 

The  first  point,  therefore,  to  be  decided,  and  which  is  of  vital 
importance  to  the  determination  of  the  whole  scheme  of  church 
policy,  is  the  rule  by  which  the  claims  of  prelacy,  or  of  popery, 
or  of  presbytery,  are  to  be  measured.  —  What  is  the  tribunal 
to  which  their  claims  are  to  be  brought  for  adjudication  ?  Who 
is  the  judge,  by  whom  our  appeal  is  to  be  finally  issued  ?  For 
until  these  preliminaries  are  decided,  "we  will  but  be  led,"  as 
Alexander  Henderson  told  King  Charles,  "  into  a  labyrinth, 
and  want  a  thread  to  wind  us  out  again. "^ 

Now  this  inquiry  is,  we  humbly  think,  most  plainly  decided 
for  us  in  a  celebrated  passage  in  the  book  of  Isaiah.  The 
Jews  were  prone  to  seek  counsel  and  direction  in  their  perplex- 
ities from  diviners,  wizards,  and  enchantments.  The  prophet 
is,  therefore,  instructed  to  rebuke  them  for  this  heaven-daring 
course,  which  was  as  foolish  as  it  was  impious.  "Should  not  a 
people,"  he  asks,  "  seek  unto  their  God  ?  —  to  the  law  and  to 
the  testimony  ?  "  "  The  law  of  God  is  the  standard  of  duty  ; 
his  sure  testimony  the  fountain  of  truth  ;  his  promise  the  firm 
ground  of  hope."  All  principles,  practices  and  characters,  are 
to  be  tried  by  this  criterion.  All  doctrines,  counsels,  or  claims, 
by  whatever  advisers  or  priestly  instructers  they  are  offered, 
must  be  brought  to  this  unerring  touchstone.  All  asserted 
privileges,  and  pretended  endowments,  must  be  submitted  to  the 
arbitrament  of  the  law  and  the  testimony  ;  so  that,  if  not  found 

1)  See  Oxford  Tr.  No.  vii.  p.  2,  2)  See  Life  of  Alexander  Hcn- 

and  Dr.  Hook's  Two  Sermons,  p.  7.       dorson,  p.  655. 


LECT.  II.]       NO  SUBMISSION  TO  THE  FATHERS.  9S 

warranted  and  authorized  by  the  word  of  God,  then  is  there  not 
even  the  shadow  of  a  foundation  upon  which  they  can  be  made 
to  rest.  They  are  manifestly  without  authority.  "  Here," 
says  the  learned,  and  more  pious,  episcopal  commentator,  Mr. 
Scott,  "  here,  in  this  passage,  we  have  a  solemn,  decisive,  and 
scriptural  appeal,  applicable  in  all  ages  and  cases." 

This  appeal  we  now  make,  and  the  answer  to  our  inquiry  — 
"  who  gave  thee  this  authority  ? "  —  we  require  shall  be  adduced 
from  the  law  and  the  testimony,  and  not  from  antiquity,  per- 
petual succession,  universal  consent  of  the  fathers,  or  the  univer- 
sal practice  of  the  primitive  church.  To  these  inferior  sources 
of  evidence  we  will  freely  allow  weight  and  value,  as  historians 
of  facts  or  of  opinions,  so  far  at  least  as  they  are  borne  out  by 
the  positive  and  authoritative  warrant  of  the  divine  word;  but 
when  considered  in  themselves,  and  as  measured  by  their  own 
intrinsic  importance,  we  at  once  reject  them  as  of  no  authorita- 
tive value  whatever.  Apart  from  scripture,  and  from  a  reason- 
able support  in  scripture,  we  give  place,  by  subjection,  no, 
not  for  an  hour,  were  it  even  to  the  whole  church,  in  all  its 
priests,  prelates  and  councils,  from  the  year  of  A.  D.  100,  when 
the  last  inspired  apostle  had  died,  to  the  present  hour.  We  utterly 
repudiate  all  antiquarian  servility,  and  spiritual  prostration  to 
the  ghostly  rule  of  church  guides  and  church  principles. 

Our  first  beginning  in  this  discussion  must  be,  the  principle 
of  the  supreme  authority  of  scripture,  as  arbiter  and  judge. 
And  this  first  principle  we  regard  as  most  reasonable,  in  a  con- 
troversy between  two  parties,  both  of  whom  professedly  re- 
ceive the  Bible  as  the  only,  or  at  least  as  an  infallible,  rule  of 
faith  and  practice.  Both  parties  mutually  acknowledge  the 
divine  origin  and  authority  of  the  Bible,  while  one  party  most 
peremptorily  rejects  any  other  rule,  except  as  "  unauthoritative 
tradition."^  We  cannot,  therefore,  allow  prelatists  to  found  their 
argument  for  their  exclusive  claims  upon  the  acknowledged  ex- 
istence of  prelacy  in  an  advanced  age  of  the  church  ;  and  thence 
to  argue  backward  to  the  apostolic  age;  for  we  yield  no  sub- 
mission whatever  to  the  opinions  of  the  church,  as  such,  and  this 
too,  at  a  time,  when  she  had  corrupted  the  plain  doctrines  and 
ordinances  of  God,  and  had  almost  suffocated  Christianity  by  a 
superincumbent  load  of  vain  and  foolish  ceremonies.  We  pro- 
test against  the  judgment  of  the  Nicene,  or  even  of  the  earlier 
church,  because  they  had  both,  in  many  and  grievous  respects, 
made  the  word  of  God  of  none  effect,  by  their  traditions  receiv- 

1)  See   Hawkins  Dissert,  oa  Unauthoritative  Tradition,  Oxford,  1819. 


36  WE   DEMAND    DIVINE   ATTTHORITY.  [lECT.  II. 

ed  from  the  fathers.  We  make  our  appeal  from  ancient,  to 
apostolic  Christianity ;  and,  from  all  will-worship  of  men,  to  the 
pure  word  and  worship  of  God.  "The  church,"  when  the  ar- 
gument suits  aprelatic  purpose,  "  is  not  built  upon  individuals  — 
nor  knows  individuals.'"  Neither  does  it  rest,  do  we  affirm, 
upon  ''catholic  teaching,  expressing  and  representing  that  more 
ancient  religion  which  of  old  time  found  voice,  and  attained  con- 
sistency in  Athanasius,  Basil,  Augustine,  Chrysostom  and  other 
primitive  doctors."^  Our  church,  and  the  true  catholic  church, 
rests  upon  the  foundation  of  apostles  and  prophets,  Jesus  Christ 
himself  being  the  chief  corner-stone.  This  rule  of  scripture,  then, 
being  a  first  principle  among  those  concerned  in  this  discussion, 
while  the  authority  of  the  fathers  is  a  question  of  most  serious 
dispute  ;^  and  since  the  authority  of  the  church  depends,  at  best, 
only  upon  human  testimony,*  we  cast  our  anchor  in  the  haven 
of  divine  truth,  fearless  of  whatever  storms,  from  the  turbulent 
ocean  of  ecclesiastical  antiquity,  may  burst  upon  us.^  Let 
those  who  will,  venture  on  it,  and  make  shipwreck  of  their 
faith. 

Now,  since  Christ  has  positively  declared  that  in  his  church 
there  should  be  —  as  we  understand  him  to  affirm  —  no  such  dis- 
tinctions and  no  such  arrogant  claims  to  superiority,  as  are  pre- 
sented by  prelatists,  (Mark  iv.  42,)  —  since  the  Bible  was  adapt- 
ed to  the  necessities  of  the  present,  as  much  as  of  the  ancient 
church  ;  since  it  expressly  forewarns  us  against  false  teachers  and 
false  doctrines  which  should  prevail  even  "  in  the  temple  of  God  ;" 
and  since,  on  the  other  hand,  the  system  of  prelacy  is  declared 
by  its  advocates  to  be  one  of  "  the  fundamental  "  and  "  great  doc- 
trines of  religion,"®  so  that  to  "  regard  it  as  no  doctrine  but  only  al- 
terable discipline,  is  not  to  keep  the  substance  of  the  faith  en- 
tire,"'' and  to  oppose  it  is  to  "violate  not  a  small,  but  a  great  duty  of 
the  christian  religion,"*  and  to  become  "  schismatics,  if  not  here- 
tics ;"®  — seeing  that  these  things  are  so,  we  demand  before  God 
and  the  world,  that  they,  who  thus  sit  in  judgment  upon  us,  and 
peril  by  their  decision,  our  everlasting  Interests — shall  produce 
divine  authority  for  the  rendition  of  such  a  judgment.    On  them, 

1)  Newman  on  Romanism,  p.  288.      the  ocean  of  councils,  the  decretals, 

2)  Ibid,  p.  289.  and  the  papal  constitutions."     Mend- 

3)  See    Chillingworth,    vol.  iii.    p.  ham's  Councils  of  Trent,  p.  63. 
237,  238.  6)  See  the  Charleston  Gospel  Mes- 

4)  See  Palmer  on  the  Ch.,  vol.  ii.  p.  senger,  July  1840,  p.  103. 
86.  7)  Ibid,  p.  IIS. 

5)  This  description  of  ecclesiastical  8)  Ibid, 

antiquity  is  given  by  the  fathers  of  the  9)  Palmer,  on  the  Church,  vol.  ii. 

Council  of  Trent,  in  their  fifth  ses-      p.  392. 
sion,  where  they  speak  of"  entering 


LECT.  II.]  THE    QUESTION    AT   ISSTTE    STATED.  37 

and  not  on  us,  rests  the  whole  burden  of  proof.  We  hold  firmly 
to  the  Bible  —  to  the  law  and  the  testimony.  And  by  that  sacred 
institute  they  must  disprove  our  claim,  and  bring  us  in  guilty 
before  God.  Till  then  —  we  charge  them  with  "sitting  in  the 
temple  of  God  as  God,  and  defying  those  whom  the  Lord  has 
not  defied." 

Addressing  them  in  the  adapted  language  of  Dryden,  we  may 
say, 

Despair  at  our  foundations,  then  to  strike, 

Till  you  can  prove  your  faith,  apostolic ; 

A  limpid  stream  drawn  from  the  native  source, 

Succession  lawful,  in  a  lineal  course. 

"  For  "  such  hiffh  claims  "  traditions  must  not  fight. 

But  you  must  prove  that  prelacy  is  right.''^ 

Before  proceeding  to  the  discussion  of  this  point,  it  will,  hoAV- 
ever,  be  important  to  present  a  full  view  of  the  doctrine  in  ques- 
tion. We  will,  therefore,  endeavor  to  state  what  is  the  faith  on 
this  subject  of  the  presbyterian  church — wherein  that  church 
harmonizes  with  the.prelatical — wherein  they  differ  from  each 
other — and  what  is  precisely  that  doctrine  against  which  we 
contend. 

The  presbyterian  church  teaches,  that  besides  the  catho- 
lic or  universal  church,  which  is  invisible,  and  consists  of  the 
whole  number  of  the  elect,  there  is  "  the  visible  church,  which 
is  also  catholic  or  universal  under  the  gospel,  (that  is,  not  confined 
to  one  nation,  as  before,  under  the  law,)  and  consists  of  all  those, 
throughout  the  world,  that  profess  the  true  religion,  together 
with  their  children,  and  is  the  kingdom  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
the  house  and  family  of  God  ;  out  of  which  there  is  no  ordinary 
possibility  of  salvation."'^ 

As  "  holy  signs  and  seals  of  the  covenant  of  grace,  immediately 
instituted  by  God,  to  represent  Christ  and  his  benefits,  and  to 
confirm  our  interest  in  him  ;  as  also  to  put  a  visible  difference 
between  those  that  belong  unto  the  church  and  the  rest  of  the 
world ;  and  solemnly  to  engage  them  to  the  service  of  God  in 
Christ,  according  to  his  word,"  which  "with  a  precept  autho- 
rizing their  use,  contain  a  promise  of  benefit  to  worthy  receivers  ;"^ 
"  there  be  only  two  sacraments  ordained  by  Christ  our  Lord 
in  the  gospel,  that  is  to  say,  baptism  and  the  Lord's  supper, 
neither  of  which  may  be  dispensed  by  any  but  by  a  minister  of 
the  word  lawfully  ordained."* 

1)  See  the  "  Hind  and  Panther,"  in  3)  Conf  of  Faith,  chap,  xxvii.  §  1 
Poetical  Works,  vol.  2.  p.  01  and  67.       and  3. 

2)  Conf.  of  Faith,  chap.  xxv.  §  2.  4)  Ibid,  §  4. 


38  THE    DOCTRINE    OF   PRESBYTERIANISM.  [lECT.  II. 

She  further  teaches,  that  "the  ordinary  and  perpetual  officers  in 
the  church  are  —  bishops  or  pastors  ;  and  the  representatives 
of  the  people  usually  styled  ruling  elders  and  deacons."' 

Further  still,  it  is  declared  that  "  it  is  absolutely  necessary  that 
the  government  of  the  church  be  exercised  under  some  certain  and 
definite  form.  And  we  hold  it  to  be  expedient  and  agreeable 
to  scripture  and  the  practice  of  the  primitive  christians,  that  the 
church  be  governed  by  congregational,  presbyterial  and  sy nod- 
ical assemblies.  In  full  consistency  with  this  belief,  we  em- 
brace in  the  spirit  of  charity,  those  christians  who  differ  with  us 
in  opinion  or  in  practice  on  these  subjects."^ 

In  accordance  with  these  catholic  sentiments,  we  are  taught 
that  "the  purest  churches  under  heaven  are  subject  both  to  mix- 
ture and  error,  and  some  have  so  degenerated  as  to  become  no 
churches,  but  synagogues  of  satan.  Nevertheless,  there  shall 
always  be  a  church  on  earth  to  worship  God  according  to  his 
will."  Now  with  this  doctrine,  substantially,  all  denomina- 
tions of  christians  not  prelatical,  agree ;  and  wherein  they  differ 
on  these  points,  which  regard  the  polity  of  the  church,  they  never- 
theless agree  in  believing  that  their  difference  is  not  —  as  far  as 
relates  to  this  question  —  a  matter  so  absolutely  essential  or  funda- 
mental as  to  endanger  the  substance  of  the  faith,  or  the  salvation  of 
souls.  These  things  our  church  maintains.  She  holds  them 
forth  in  her  standards  for  the  instruction  of  her  own  members  ;  and 
requires  full  compliance  therewith  from  her  own  officers,  as  being 
"  in  her  judgment  agreeable  to  scripture  and  the  practice  of  the 
primitive  churches."  But  she  leaves  all  other  denominations 
free  to  act,  as  they  may  think  most  accordant  to  the  will  of 
Christ  —  by  whom  and  through  whom  and  with  whom,  as  their 
common  lord  and  master,  she  desires  to  hold  "  the  unity  of  the 
Spirit,  in  the  bond  of  peace,  with  all  that  in  every  place  call  on 
the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  both  theirs  and  ours." 

Far  different  from  this,  however,  are  the  claims  of  prelacy,  as 
laid  down  in  the  doctrine  of  apostolical  succession.  In  order  that 
you  may  understand  fully  and  clearly  what  is  implied  in  this 
doctrine,  we  will  exhibit,  at  some  length,  those  points  in  which 
we  agree. 

It  is  then,  we  remark,  mutually  allowed,  that  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  has  established  a  church  on  earth,  which  is  his  kingdom  — 
house  —  or  family.  That  into  this  church  the  Lord,  as  his  ordi- 
nary method,  gathers  such  as  shall  be  saved  by  the  ministration 
of  his  word  and   spirit.     That  all    are  under  obligation  to  be- 

1)  Form  of  Gov't,  chap.  iii.  2)  Form  of  Gov't,  chap.  viii.  §  1. 


LECT.  II.]  THE    DOCTRINE    OF   PRELACY.  39 

lieve  on  him,  and  to  confess  him  before  men,  by  a  union,  where 
this  is  possible,  with  his  visible  church.  That,  for  the  edifica- 
tion of  this  body  and  the  perfecting  of  the  saints,  Christ  has  or- 
dained two  sacraments,  of  baptism  and  the  Lord's  supper,  in 
connexion  with  the  preaching  of  the  gospel.  That  these  are  to 
be  administered  by  those  whom  he  has  called  into  this  ministry. 
We  are  also  agreed  in  believing  that  this  church  is  holy,  catholic, 
and  apostolic  —  visible  and  perpetual  —  one  and  unchangeable 
—  and  that  she  is  the  nursery  of  heaven. 

Thus  far  our  views  are  concurrent  and  harmonious,  and  we 
may  say  that  we  have  one  God  and  Father  —  one  Lord  and  Sa- 
viour— one  Spirit  and  Sanctifier,  —  one  faiih,  one  baptism,  and 
one  sacramental  communion. 

The  claims  of  prelacy  to  which  we  object  are,  in  addition  to 
all  that  has  been  now  stated  —  separable  from  it  —  and  super- 
added to  it.  According  to  this  system,  the  church  of  Christ  is 
identified  with  the  prelacy  ;  to  which,  as  such,  is  given  by  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  an  exclusive  supremacy  and  divine  right,  in 
perpetual  possession.  The  holy,  catholic,  and  apostolic  church 
is,  therefore,  limited  by  the  very  necessity  of  the  case  —  the 
terms  of  its  original  institution  —  to  those  churches  which  are 
prelatical  in  their  form.  To  these  are  committed  all  the 
authority,  in  any  way  delegated  by  Christ  to  his  church  on 
earth.  To  this  church  alone  is  given,  as  an  hereditary  trust, 
"  the  grace  of  the  episcopal  order'"  —  that  "  sacred  gift" 
whereby  alone  *'  any  real  vocation  can  be  conferred  to  the  min- 
istry" —  or  any  efficacy  imparted  to  the  administration  of  the 
word  and  sacraments.  Now  "this  supreme  authority" — we 
are  further  taught  —  having  been  given  by  Christ  to  his  apos- 
tles, was,  by  them,  committed  to  an  order  of  men  called  "  the 
episcopate,"  prelates,  or  bishops,  who  are  alone  empowered,  to 
use  the  words  of  Epiphanius,  "  to  beget  fathers  of  the  church 
by  ordination,"  while  presbyters,  in  virtue  of  the  imposition  of 
the  bishop's  hands,  having  thereby  received  "  the  inward  grace 
of  the  divine  commission  with  which  the  church  has  power  to 
animate"  their  previously  lifeless  spirits'^  —  are  enabled  "to 
beget  sons  by  baptism,"  and  to  minister  at  the  altar.  "  Episco- 
pacy," (prelacy,)  in  short,  as  defined  by  Bishop  Onderdonk, 
"  declares  that  the  christian  ministry  was  established  in  three 
orders,  called  ever  since  the   apostolic  age,  bishops,   presby- 

1)  See   all  these   expressions  in      apart  has  not  before  received  the  Holy 
Palmer,  vol.  ii.  part  6.  Ghost  for  the   office   and   work  of  a 

2)  "The    church    declares    her     priest  in  the  church  of   God."     Bp 
full   persuasion  that  the    person  set      Onderdonk. 


40  THE  DOCTRINE  OF  PRELACY.  [lECT.  H. 

ters  or  elders,  and  deacons ;  of  which  the  hif^hest  only  has 
the  right  to  ordain  and  confirm — that  of  general  supervision  in 
a  diocese  —  that  of  the  chief  administration  of  spiritual  disci- 
pline —  besides  enjoying  all  the  rights  of  the  other  grades," 
and  "having  the  power  of  supreme  discipline  over  the  clergy."' 
All  this  "  the  church  declares  to  have  been  established  by 
DIVINE  inspiration/"^  and  to  be  by  divine  right.^ 

This  original  grant,  thus  bestowed  on  the  episcopate  by  the 
apostles,  has  been,  we  are  also  assured,  transmitted  by  the 
church,  and  is  to  be  traced  through  "  an  unbroken  line"  of  pre- 
lates, in  personal  succession,  from  its  first  communication,  until 
this  hour  ;  and  the  authenticity  of  any  claim  to  this  sacred  and 
apostolic  gift  must  be  attested  by  the  manifestation  of  this  unin- 
terrupted and  unquestionable  lineal  descent.^  Every  link  in  the 
chain  by  which  the  existing  prelacy  is  united  to  the  apostolate 
is,  we  are  assured,  in  preservation  —  while  any  such  succession 
is  positively  denied  to  any  other  church  or  denomination  what- 
ever. 

"  The  real  ground  of  our  authority,"  say  these  divines,  "  is 
our  apostolical  descent."^  "  The  Spirit,  the  sacred  gift,  has 
been  handed  down  to  our  present  Bishops."®  "  An  uninter- 
rupted series  of  valid  ordinations  has  carried  down  the  apostol- 
ical succession  in  our  churches  to  the  present  day."'^  "  We 
must  necessarily  consider  none  ordained  who  have  not  been 
thus  ordained,'"**  "appealing  to  that  warrant  which  makes  us  ex- 
clusively God's  ambassadors."^  "  Now  every  one  of  us  believes 
this."i» 

From  this  view  of  the  doctrine  of  apostolical  succession,  which 
is  a  fundamental  article  of  the  Romish  church,  and  "  which 
has  been  inherited  and  embodied  by  the  Church  of  England, 
and  other  episcopal  communions,'"^  the  points  of  our  difference 
may  be  as  clearly  developed  as  are  the  points  of  our  agree- 
ment. 

In  opposition  to  this  theory,  (for  we  deny  that  it  has  any 
foundation  in  the  word  of  God,  or  in  reason,)  we  maintain,  there- 

1)  See  Wks.  on  Episcopacy,  p.  from  St.  Peter  or  St.  Paul."  Dr. 
419  and  436.  Hook's  Two  Sermons,  p.  7,  8. 

2)  See  do.  Charge,  1831,  p.  IG,  5)  Oxf.  Tr.  vol.  i.  p.  6. 
immediately  applied  to  the  deaconate.  6)  Do.  do. 

3)  "  From  its  establishment  to  the  7)  Dr.  Hook  do.  do.,  and  see  Note 
present  day,  there   have   been    three  A  to  Lecture  1. 

distinct    orders    in    the    priesthood."  8)  Oxf.  Tr.  vol.  i.  p.  11. 

Pratt's  Old  Paths,  p.  53.  9)  Do.  p.  23  and  131. 

4)  See  Palmer,  vol.  ii,  p.  453.  10)  Do.  do.  p.  10,  and  see  Note  A. 
"There  is  not  a  bishop,  priest  or  11)  So  speaks  Mr.  Isaac  Ta3'lor, 
deacon  among  us,  who  cannot,  if  he  an  episcopalian,  in  his  Spiritual  Des- 
please,  trace  his  own  spiritual  descent  potism,  p.  145.     Eng.  Ed. 


LECT.  II.]  WHAT     PRESBYTERY     REJECTS.  41 

fore,  that  bishops  are  not,  by  divine  right,  an  order  superior  to 
presbyters  ;  or  possessed  of  any  one  of  their  asserted  preroga- 
tives, in  any  higher  degree  than  what  is  common  to  presbyters; 
or  than  has  been  voluntarily  delegated  to  them  by  presbyters. 
We  maintain  that  the  ordinations  of  presbyters  alone,  are  quite 
as  valid  as  those  by  prelates  and  presbyters  conjointly  ;  and 
more  regular  than  those  performed  by  a  single  prelate ;  and  that 
the  ininistry  in  the  different  reformed  churches  is  equally  valid 
and  efficacious,  to  say  the  very  least — whether  examined  as  to 
its  authority,  or  as  to  its  results  —  with  that  of  the  prelatical 
communion. 

You  thus  perceive  that,  in  utterly  repudiating  and  rejecting 
this  sacerdotal  authority  —  which  is  claimed  by  the  privileged 
order  of  prelates,  as  their  exclusive  inheritance  —  as  an  arro- 
gant usurpation,  in  part,  of  the  rights  of  the  other  clergy ;  and 
in  part,  also,  of  a  power  and  dominion  never  given  by  Christ  to 
any  officers  whatever  in  his  church  ;  and  as  being  thus  an  en- 
croachment upon  the  authority  of  our  only  King  and  Law- 
giver, and  upon  the  liberties  of  his  people  —  we  do  not,  in  any 
degree,  attach  to  ourselves  the  criminality  of  that  heartless 
bigotry,  which,  because  of  such  differences  alone,  would  excom- 
municate from  the  kingdom  of  Christ,  and  consign  to  uncove- 
nanted  mercy,  millions  of  professing  christians. 

We  do  not,  therefore,  reject  ordination  as  a  proper  and 
necessary  service.  We  set  apart,  by  the  public  and  solemn 
imposition  of  hands,  such  as  give  credible  evidence  that  they 
have  been  already  called  of  God  to  the  work  of  the  ministry. 
But  we  utterly  deny  that  there  is  any  mysterious  efficacy  in  the 
hands  of  prelates,  whereby  that  "  vis  insita,"  which  comes 
living  along  the  line  of  their  prelatical  succession,  can  be  im- 
parted to  their  less  privileged  brethren.  The  source  of  all  spir- 
itual power  and  sacred  gifts,  we  trace  beyond  any  terrestrial 
springs,  to  the  pure  fountain  of  heavenly  influence.  We 
believe,  therefore,  that  there  have  been  many  lord  bishops 
who  were  not  the  Lord's  bishops,  and  many  man-made  minis- 
ters who  were  not  called,  or  sent,  or  commissioned,  by  God,  or 
acknov/ledged  by  him  at  all.  "  They  are  not  all  Israel  that 
are  of  Israel." 

The  question  before  us,  then,  is  not  whether  a  christian  min- 
istry is  necessary  to  the  christian  church  — or  whether  ordination 
is  necessary  to  the  regular  induction  of  that  ministry,  within  any 
particular  denomination.  Neither  is  it  the  question,  whether  epis- 
copal ordination  is  valid — since  all  true  presbytkrs  are 
BISHOPS,  and  bishops  can  be  nothing  more,  even  if  true  and  valid, 
6 


42  WHAT    PRESBYTERY    REJECTS.  [lECT.  II. 

than  presbyters.  We  do  not  question  whether  one  of  these  bish- 
ops or  presbyters  might  be  made  a  constant  moderator  of  the 
presbytery,  and  thus  become,  officially,  chief  bishop  or  pastor, 
possessing  delegated  and  exclusive  powers.'  The  expediency  of 
such  a  course  we  must  strongly  deny ;  but  its  legality  we  would 
not  be  hasty  in  rejecting.^  Irenajus,  we  know,  was  thus  moder- 
ator of  the  council  in  Gaul,  for  twenty-four  years,  while  such  a 
practice  was  customary,  also,  in  the  later  Waldensian  synods, 
and  is  still  followed  in  the  French  presbyteries.^  We  regard 
prelatical  bishops  as  having  originated  in  this  very  custom  of  the 
early  church.  But  while  we  might  thus  allow  to  them  this 
extrinsic  and  accidental  authority,  though  not  as  by  divine,  but 
only  by  ecclesiastical  right,  we  altogether  deny  that  they  possess 
any  intrinsic  or  essential  authority,  with  which  presbyter  bishops 
are  not  endowed.  The  original  apostolic  authority  of  both  is, 
we  contend,  equal,  supreme,  and  the  same. 

Neither  would  we  dispute  whether  the  concurrence  of  this 
chief  bishop,  or  perpetual  moderator,  —  where  the  custom  of  the 
church  allows  such  a  dangerous  office  to  exist — just  as  in 
those  churches,  in  which,  (as  in  our  own,)  the  office  of  moder- 
ator is  temporary  —  is  essential  to  a  regular  and  valid  ordina- 
tion in  that  church.  For  this  moderator  is,  by  the  very  tenure 
of  his  office,  the  organ  of  the  presbytery  or  council,  and  in- 
trusted with  its  delegated  authority  —  and  in  a  proper  sense, 
the  minister  of  ordination  ;  as  being  the  mouth,  the  head,  and  the 
acting  officer  of  the  ordaining  body.  But  that  an  exclusive, 
inherent,  episcopal  grace,  is  transmitted  in  an  order  of  prelates, 
whose  very  office  it  is,  by  divine  right,  to  govern  and  ordain 
other  ministers  ;  and  this,  too,  so  that  no  other  ordination  but 
theirs  is  allowable  or  proper ;  this  is  what  we  deny,  and  for 
which  we  demand  sufficient  proof.*  For  this  pre-eminence,  we 
require  the  same  positive  and  indubious  testimony,  which  these 
very  prelates  demand  of  Romanists,  when  they  assert  the 
divine  pre-eminence  of  Peter  and  of  Rome.^  If  even  the 
admission  that  Peter  was  personally,  on  some  accounts,  fore- 
most among  the  apostles,  would  not  authorize  the  conclusion 

1)  On  appointing  moderators  for  of  Dr.  Samuel  Johnson,  of  King's 
life,  see  Hill's  View  of  the  Constitu-  College,  New  York,  (New  York, 
tionof  the  Church  of  Scotland,  Edinb.  1805,  p.  25,)  the  question  is  thus  sta- 
1803,  p.  169,  part  2,  lect.  2.  ted  :  "  No  act  of  ordination  and  gov- 

2)  On  this  danger,  see  Altare  Da-  ernment,  for  several  ages,  was  ever 
mascenum,  &.c.,  Davidis  Calderwood,  allowed  to  be  lawful,  without  a  bishop 
Lugduni,  1708,  4to  p.  221.  at  the  head  of  the  presbytery."     What 

3)  Blair's  Waldenses,  vol.i.  p.  36.  does  this  make  for  diocesan  prelacy  ? 

4)  The  artfulness  of  prelatists,  in  5)  See  Palmer,  vol.  ii.  part  vii. 
laying  down  their  premises,  is  truly  chap.  1,  et  passim.  See  also  Newman 
iistonishing.   Thus,  in  Chandler's  Life  on  Romanism. 


LECT.  II.]  WHAT    PRESBYTERY    REJECTS.  43 

that  he  had  dominion  over  them  ;  neither  would  the  supposition, 
that  prelates  are,  by  virtue  of  their  office,  foremost  among 
presbyters,  give  them  any  supremacy  over  them/  And  what- 
ever we  might  be  willing  to  grant  as  a  privilege,  we  most  reso- 
lutely deny,  when  it  is  required  upon  the  ground  of  principle 
and  of  right.  When  these  honorary  officers  would,  therefore, 
boast  themselves,  over  those  who  are  the  very  founders  of  their 
office ;  and  assert  a  despotic  and  hereditary  rule  —  then  do  we 
appeal  to  the  word  of  God,  and  put  in  a  demand  for  judgment, 
against  this  doctrine,  as  being,  to  use  Mr.  Newman's  words, 
no  less  "  gratuitous  in  proof  than  as  it  is  in  itself  untrue.'" 

Neither,  again,  do  we  deny  that  there  ever  has  been,  and 
ever  will  be,  a  succession  of  ministers  ;  as  there  ever  has  been, 
and  ever  will  be,  a  true  and  perpetuated  church,  whose  minis- 
ters they  are.  To  this  church  we  belong,  and  to  this  succes- 
sion we  lay  claim. ^  But  what  we  affirm  to  be  a  figment,  and 
without  any  sufficient  proof  is,  that  Christ  appointed  three  dis- 
tinct orders  in  this  ministry — bishops,  priests,  and  deacons  — 
that  of  these  three  essentially  distinct  orders,  there  ever  has  been, 
and  ever  will  be,  an  uninterrupted  succession,  and  that  to  these 
the  gifts  of  the  Holy  Spirit  have  been  limited,  and  through  them 
alone  are  enjoyed.  Irenasus  says,  "  et  ubi  spiritus  Dei,  illuc  ec- 
clesia  et  omnis  gratia  ;"  that  is,  where  the  spirit  of  God  is,  there 
is  the  church,  and  all  grace.^  The  presence  of  God's  spirit, 
therefore,  is  the  sure  index  to  this  *'  legitimate  ecclesiastical 
perpetuity."  We  learn  from  him,  says  Faber,  "  both  where 
we  are  not  to  seek  the  true  catholic  church,  and  where  we  are 
to  seek  it."''     Now  has  this  Spirit,  we  ask,  been  confined  to  pre- 

1)  See  Palmer,  vol.  ii.  p488,  492,      the  foundation  of  Christianity,  and  of 
and  Oxford  Tr.  vol.  i.  p.  92.  primary  doctrines ;  and  this  transmis- 

2)  Newman    on   Romanism,   p.      sion  attested  by  a  succession  of  authen- 
336.  tic  writings.     Does   the    certainty  of 

3)  "  We  rejoice  in  the  fact  of  the  our  knowledge  of  the  common  "law 
succession,  such  as  it  was,  and  of  the  depend  on  our  being  able  to  produce 
tradition  of  a  regula  fidcl  as  the  com-  a  perfect  list  of  lords  chief  justice  .? 
mon  law  of  Christianity;  and  here  "2.  If  the  catalogues  were  indubita- 
we  find  an  evidence  of  the  origin  and  bly  complete,  nothing  would  follow 
divine  authority  of  our  religion  and  to  the  detriment  of  our  views,  or  to 
of  its  principal  doctrines.  We  regard  the  advantage  of  the  style  of  episco- 
the  succession  and  tradition,  72oi  indeed  pacy  against  which  scripture  and  an- 
as autltority,  yet  as  a  valuable  auxilia-  tiquity  compel  us  to  protest.  We 
ry  or  collateral  elucidation  of  our  ONLY  look  at  those  pleasant  lists  with  a 
standard  of  faith  and  practice,  the  smile  of  doubt ;  but  we  see  in  their 
holy  scripture.    But  let  me  remark, —  early  links  nothing  but  the  idea  of  a 

"1.  Our   argument    does   not   turn  line  of  lowly  pastors  of  congregational 

upon  tlie  p£rA'o?!rt/ succession,  a  thing,  churches." — Dr.    Pye    Smith's    First 

notwithstanding  the  boasting  of  Dr.  Letter  to  Dr.  Lee,  p.  26. 
Cave,  Mr.  Bingham,  &c.,  impossible  4)  Adv.  Haer.  Lib.  iii.  c.  40. 

to  be  satisfactorily  made  out.     It  [i.  e.  5)  See  on  the  Anc't.  Vdlenses, 

the  genuine  christian  idea  of  succes-  &c.  p. 27. 
sion,]  lies  in  the  transmission  oT facts, 


44  WHAT    IS    INVOLVED    IN    THIS    QUESTION.  [lECT.  II. 

lates  and  refused  to  all  other,  the  reformed  protestant  churches  ? 
God  forbid.  But  if  we  possess  the  "omnis  gratia,"  the  "all 
grace  "  —  we  may  well  be  satisfied,  even  if  we  are  denied  by 
prelates  the  title  of  "  ecclesia,"  or  church. 

This  subject,  therefore,  involves  in  it  plainly  these  three 
questions : 

First,  who  are  the  divinely  appointed  ministers  of  the  chris- 
tian church  —  presbyters  or  bishops,  and  these  alone,  as  one 
order  —  or  bishops,  presbyters  and  deacons,  as  three  essentially 
distinct  orders,  having  essentially  different  oflSces  and  powers? 

Secondly,  by  what  authority  are  these  men  called  into  the 
ministry  ?     By  the  authority  of  God,  or  of  man  ? 

And  thirdly,  is  this  divine  authority  of  the  ministry  com- 
mitted to  the  church  as  a  sacred  deposit,  to  be  transmitted  in 
unbroken  succession  ;  and  to  depend  for  its  virtue  upon  this  un- 
broken succession,  from  the  apostles  to  the  end  of  the  world? 
Or  is  it  so  immediately  derived  from  Christ,  through  the  agency 
of  his  Spirit,  and  so  dependent  upon  his  divine  gift,  that  whether 
ecclesiastical  order  is  interrupted  or  not,  this  authority  can  be 
communicated  and  preserved  to  the  church? 

If  it  is  tlie  doctrine  of  the  Bible,  that  presbyter-bishops  have 
only  in  part  the  divine  authority  which  is  there  given  in  per- 
petuity to  the  ministry ;  that  prelates  alone  have  the  power 
of  ordination  and  of  government  —  that  to  these  prelates  is 
committed  the  Holy  Ghost  —  and  that  this  heavenly  gift  cometh 
upon  the  church,  not  immediately  from  God,  but  mediately 
through  these  prelates,  by  a  line  of  uninterrupted  succession, 
so  that  without  and  beyond  them,  these  sacred  gifts  cannot  be 
enjoyed  —  then  does  it  follow,  that  nearly  the  whole  of  protest- 
ant Christendom  lies  beyond  the  pale  of  the  church  ;  and  that 
while  saying  "  peace,  peace  to  themselves,"  they  are  still  in  the 
shadow  of  death,  without  God,  and  without  hope.  But  if,  on 
the  other  hand,  ordination  is  the  scriptural  and  legitimate  work 
of  presbyter-bishops  —  if  all  that  authority,  power  and  grace, 
which  render  any  ministry  effectual  to  salvation,  is  derived  im- 
mediately from  Christ,  and  is  not  communicable  by  any  man  or 
body  of  men  on  earth  —  and  if  the  only  succession  which  is  at 
all  essential  to  the  true  being,  or  to  the  well  being,  of  any  church, 
is  a  succession  in  the  pure  doctrine  of  the  word  of  God,  and  in 
the  due  administration  of  God's  two,  and  only  appointed,  sacra- 
ments—  then  does  it  follow  that  this  system  of  prelacy  is  not 
only  baseless  in  itself;  but,  what  is  far  worse,  that  it  is  posi- 
tively unchristian. 

For  this  system,  therefore,  as  now  portrayed,  and  which  we 
pronounce  a  schism  from  the  whole  reformation  —  we  demand 


LECT.    II.]  THIS    DEMAND    URGED    BY    ALL    CHURCHES.  45 

express  and  indubitable  sanction  from  the  word  of  God,  We 
fall  back  upon  this  written  testimony,  as  the  only  inspired  law — 
the  only  code  of  Heaven's  institutes  —  the  only  rule  by  which 
we  are  to  be  judged,  either  of  men,  or  as  it  hath  pleased  Him, 
by  God  himself.'  On  no  lower  authority  than  this,  is  it  possible 
to  sustain  such  unbounded  assumptions  ;  and  to  no  other  power 
will  we  yield  subjection,  while  this  magna  charta  of  our  spiritual 
liberties  is  in  preservation. 

The  grounds  upon  which  we  rest  the  justice  of  this  de- 
mand, that,  being  christians,  we  shall  be  tried  at  the  bar  of 
Christ,  and  if  worthy  of  death,  receive  it  at  his  hands,  rather 
than  fall  into  the  hands  of  men,  are  in  part,  these  : 

I.  In  the  first  place,  these  same  exclusive  claims  were  asserted 
by  the  ancient  heretics,  as  is  taught  us  by  Tertullian,'  who  says 
they  were  on  this  account  to  "  be  detected  by  the  diversity  of 
their  doctrine."  The  Arian  churches  which  once  prevailed  to 
such  an  extent,  and  through  so  many  countries ;  the  Nestorian, 
Eutychian,  Jacobite,  and  other  churches,  which  were  all  in  their 
turn  condemned  as  heretical ;  had  undisputed  claims  to  this 
apostolical  succession.  The  Greek,  Armenian,  Syrian,  Abys- 
sinian, and  other  oriental  bodies,  all  assert  their  rightful  pos- 
session of  this  hereditary  title  to  the  charter  of  the  true  church. 

The  mere  production,  therefore,  of  a  catalogue  of  bishops,  in 
all  apparent  regularity,  from  the  apostles  down  to  the  present 
time,  is  nothing  to  the  purpose.  The  Greek  church,  the  Ethi- 
opic,  and  others,  are  equally  willing  to  spread  out  their  endless 
genealogies.  Bellarmine  says,  "  the  church  of  Constantinople 
has  one  from  the  emperor  Constantine  in  an  uninterrupted  series, 
and  Nicephorus  likewise  deduces  the  names  of  all  the  bishops, 
even  from  the  time  when  the  apostle  Andrew  flourished."  And 
yet,  notwithstanding  all  this,  Bellarmine  and  his  Romish  coad- 
jutors deny  to  the  Greeks  any  true  and  valid  apostolical  succes- 
sion. They  require  in  order  to  the  substantiation  of  such  a  claim, 
not  only  an  uninterrupted  lineal  succession  of  prelates,  but  also, 
that  no  single  heretic  shall  be  found  among  them  all.^  Such,  also, 
are  the  boasted  pretensions  of  the  Romish  church,  which  ex- 
communicates and  anathematizes  the  English,  as  schismatical 

1)  John  viii.  50,  and  xii.  48.  true  church,  and  had  been  living;  when 

2)  And  so  Cyril  Hieros.  Catech.  18  Luther  appeared,  and  had  before  him 
in  Gary's  Testimonies,  p.  249.  See  theNestorians  andEutychians,the  Ar- 
Oxford  Tracts,  vol.  l,p.  37,  §  8,  and  menians,  Egyptians  and  Ethiopians  in 
Oxford    Tracts,  vol.   1,  p.  55G,  557.  the   east,  the    numerous   churches  of 

3)  Bishop  Williams  urges  this  very  Greece,  &c.,  which  pretend  to  a  du- 
argument  against  the  Romanists.  ration  as  good  and  sufficient  as  thai  of 
Notes  of  the  Ch.  Examd.  p.  100,  101.  Rome,  and  the  last  of  which  is  ack- 
"  Suppose  that  a  person  that  has  ira-  knowledged  by  the  Bishop  of  Bitonto, 
bibed  this  principle  is  in  quest  of  the  in  the   council  of  Trent,  to   be  '  the 


46  NO    CERTAINTY    BEYOND    THE    BIBLE.  [lECT.    II. 

in  its  character,  invalid  in  its  ministry,  and  inefficacious  in  its 
sacraments.' 

Now,  since  there  are  different  and  rival  claimants  to  this  same 
high  prerogative  and  supremacy,^  we  require  a  judge  who  may 
arbitrate  their  respective  pretensions,  before  we  abandon  "  a 
good  hope"  and  a  "  well-grounded  assurance,"  and  submit  our 
souls,  we  cannot  tell  whether  to  heretics,  Romanists,  or  to  An- 
glican prelates.  Such  a  judge  is  the  more  necessary,  inas- 
much as,  when  our  ship  is  once  loosened  from  the  firm  moor- 
ings of  scripture,  we  know  not  whither  we  are  to  be  driven, 
but  must  allow  ourselves  to  be  swept  by  every  wind  of  doctrine, 
w'ithout  any  cheering  light  from  sun,  moon,  or  stars.  There  is 
evidently  no  security,  no  rest,  for  the  sole  of  one's  foot,  except 
in  the  form  of  sound  words  f  and  of  this  much  we  are  assured, 
that  the  true  church  of  Christ  "  knows  no  master  but  Christ,  as 
he  enjoined  ;"^  since  "  Christ  has  taught  his  church,  by  his 
scriptures,  in  what  he  will  be  glorified  ;  and  it  is  not  for  us  to 
tolerate  other  ways,  however  they  may  challenge  our  admiration, 
for  their  ingenuity  ;  or  our  kindness,  by  the  seeming  sincerity 
of  their  inventors."^ 

Neither  do  we  believe  lliere  is  any  "  via  media,"  or  middle 
path,  between  this  exclusive  supremacy  of  Bible  doctrine,  order, 
and  polity,  and  the  full-grown  enormities  of  the  papal  hierarchy. 
For,  if  the  church  has  committed  to  it,  under  divine  guidance 
and  promise,  an  inherent  power  of  gradual  developement  and 
progressive  alteration,  —  then,  why  this  power  should  be  limited 
to  the  age  of  the  Nicene  church,  or  why  it  should  be  even  termi- 

mother  of  the  Latin,  and  to  which  the  pose;  which  hatli  had  an  uninterrupted 

Latin  owes  what  it  hath  ;'  how  sliall  succession  of  bishops,  from  the  apos- 

he  be  able  to  determine  where  he  shall  ties,  and  is  of  greater   antiquity    than 

fix?"     So    also  Bishop  Fowler.    Ibid.  the  church  of  Rome,  and   which  hath 

pp.  124,  123,  130    See  also  Dr.  Thorpe  produced     more    fathers    than     that 

in    Ibid,    pp.    135.    136,    138,     140.  church."     See  note  B. 

"  To  pass  by  the  christians  under  the  ])  See  Palmer,  on  the    Ch.  vol.  2, 

Patriarch  of  Mozale,  of  whom  Postel-  part  C.  chap.  ii. 

lus  saith,  "Though  they  are  but  few  2)  "  It  is  not  true,"  says  Bishop  On- 

in  comparison  of  what  they  have  been,  derdonk,  in  his  charge    on  the  rule  of 

yet  they  are  many  more  than  us  Lat-  faith,  (p.  7,  Tract  form,)  "that  tradition 

ins."     To  say  nothing  neither  of  the  is  the  same  among  churches  ofdiffer- 

Armenian    christians,    falsely    called  ent    countries.      For    example ;    tlie 

Nestorians,  (whose   Catholic,  as  they  Greek,  Armenian,  Syriac  and  Coptic 

call  their  patriarch,  "  Otho  Frisangen-  churches  do  not  agree  with  the  church 

sis,"  reports  to   have  under   his   obe-  of  Rome    in  regard    to  the    traditions 

dience  above  a  thousand  bishops,  from  before  us —  that  the  latter  is  the  mis- 

the  report  of  his  legates  sent  to  Rome,)  tress  of  all  churches." 

both  which  vast  bodies   of  christians  3)  Oxford  Tr.  vol.   2,  p.  425,   and 

acknowledge  no  subjection  to  the  see  also  pp.  423,  424. 

of  Rome  :  I  say,  to  pass  these  by,  we  4)  Ibid,  427. 

need    not  instance    any  besides  the  5)  Ibid,  423. 

Greek  church,  for  the   aforesaid  pur- 


LECT.    II.]  PRELACY     LEADS    TO    POPERY.  47 

natedat  the  period  of  the  Tridentine  council  — we  cannot  possi- 
bly divine.  If  the  church  was  authorized  to  re-construct,  alter, 
amend,  or  beautify  the  glorious  fabric  of  the  christian  temple,  as 
left  by  Christ  and  his  apostles,  then  do  these  church  principles 
equally  sanction  the  continued  adaptation  of  this  building,  in  its 
internal  arrangements,  and  in  its  outer  appearance,  to  the  al- 
tered spirit  and  temper  of  the  times. ^  The  theory  of  the  papacy, 
assumes  the  continuance,  with  the  church,  of  a  divine  prerog- 
ative and  supremacy  of  legislative  control,  which  the  theory  of 
the  prelacy  regards  as  having  ceased  somewhere — the  precise 
time  she  has  not  yet  determined  —  between  the  third  and  the 
eighth  centuries,  according  to  the  opposing  views  of  her  contra- 
dictory theologians.^  But  it  can  be,  and  has  been  shown,  that 
the  ripened  system  of  popery,  as  it  now  exists,  is  nothing  more 
than  the  maturity  of  those  principles  and  practices,  which  were 
in  full  blow,  as  early  even  as  the  fourth  age.  And  there  is, 
therefore,  most  plainly  no  alternative,  nor  resting  place,  between 
the  undisputed  sovereignty  of  scripture,  and  the  infallibility  of 
the  Romish  church.  The  single  question  is  between  the  Bible 
and  the  church.  "The  popery  which  is  even  now  gathering 
over  our  heavens  from  all  quarters,  is  nothing  but  the  digested 
superstition  which  the  good  Augustine  (and  the  other  divines  of 
the  Nicene  age)  set  forward  in  their  day. "^ 

To  sustain  the  enormous  structure  of  a  hierarchical  and  pre- 
latic  church,  any  other  foundation  is  altogether  insufficient,  and 
hence  if  this  is  "  a  building  of  God,  and  not  made  with  hands,"  it 
must  be  shown  to  rest  upon  that  rock,  against  which  the  gates 
of  hell  shall  not  be  able  to  prevail. 

It  has  been  made  obvious  that  the  fact  of  uninterrupted  suc- 
cession— much  more,  the  mere  claim  to  such  succession  —  can 
prove  nothing  as  to  the  identification  of  the  true  church.  Time 
was,  when  such  a  claim  constituted  no  distinction  whatever,  and 
that  confessedly,  between  the  orthodox  and  the  heterodox,  the 
true  and  the  untrue  churches  of  Christ.  And  even  now  do  we 
find  various  bodies,  with  very  varying  forms,  ordinances,  rites, 
ceremonies  and  doctrines,  who  regard  each  other  as  heretical 
and  schismatical,  and  many  of  whose  views,  we,  in  common  with 
three-fourths  of  protestant  Christendom,  must  esteem  erroneous 

1)  See  Dr.  Miller's  letter  to   Dr.  separated   by  mutual    excommunica- 

Pusey,    Lond.  1840,    p.   11    and   13,  tions.     Palrner,  on  the  Ch.,  vol.  2,  p. 

&c.  '  189.     Miller's  Letter  to  Dr.  Pusey,  p. 

2)  Mr.    Palmer    and    Dr.   Pusey  12,  28. 
would  seem  to   extend   this  period  as  3)  See  Ancient  Christ'y,  vol.1,  p. 

late  as  to  the   year  1054,    when   the  445,  et  passim, 
eastern  and  western   churches   were 


48  PRELACY   IF   TRUE   MUST   BE  [lECT.  II. 

—  all  asseverating  that  they  inherit  this  pure,  unadulterated,  un- 
interrupted, indefectible,  or  infallible  succession.  As  plain,  there- 
fore, as  any  thing  can  be,  this  mark  can  never  guide  us  to  the 
true  church,  since  it  may  just  as  readily  guide  us  to  the  false.  And 
therefore  must  it  be  made  evident  from  holy  writ,  that  Christ 
has  left  his  promise  and  all  his  bequeathed  inheritance  of  divine 
blessings,  with  the  prelacy  of  England  ;  or  with  any  prelacy 
whatever ;  or  that  Christ  —  a  fact  we  have  never  yet  discovered  — 
has  instituted  any  such  thing  as  a  prelacy  at  all.  For  as  Hooker 
remarks,  "  our  conviction  can  only  be  of  that  strength  which  the 
evidence  will  warrant,  and  one  scripture  proof  must  outweigh  even 
ten  thousand  general  councils.'" 

"  We  allege,  as  a  second  reason  for  our  demand  of  a  full 
and  explicit  scriptural  authority  for  these  high-church  principles, 
that  were  they  —  supposing  them  to  be  correct  —  of  essential 
importance,  they  would  have  been  plainly  revealed  in  scripture, 
and  be  susceptible  of  plain  scripture  establishment. 

Whether  there  is  such  an  institution  as  the  church  of  Christ  at 
all,  can  be  known  surely  only  from  the  scriptures  —  now  written 
and  completed  —  but  during  the  lives  of  our  Lord  and  his  apostles, 
delivered  orally,  and  from  time  to  time.  This  fact  cannot  be 
made  certain  to  us  by  any  uninspired  men,  for  the  church  is  an 
institution  of  God,  for  the  accomplishment  of  his  wise  and  gra- 
cious ends,  and  can  be  made  known  only  by  Him  ;  either 
through  a  written  revelation,  or  in  some  other  mode.  The 
church  being  thus  divine  in  her  origin,  must  receive  her  charter 
from  heaven,  and  this  must  be  contained  in  that  revelation,  which 
is  now  preserved  in  a  written  form,  for  our  guidance.  But  it  is 
equally  plain  that  this  charter  alone,  can  declare  what  is  the  nat- 
ure—  what  the  constitution  —  what  the  faith,  order,  worship, 
laws  and  powers  of  this  heavenly  society.  Being  not  a  natural 
body,  not  originated  or  moulded  by  man's  wisdom  or  sagacity, 
but  being  altogether  a  mystical  body,  and  removed  from  hu- 
man comprehension  or  discovery,  the  entire  platform,  genius, 
and  design  of  the  church,  must  evidently  depend  upon  her  insti- 
tution, her  sacred  charter,  her  heavenly  commission,  and  that  code 
of  laws  framed  for  her  by  her  supreme  and  ever-living  Head.^ 

1)  See  Wks.,  vol.  1 ,  p.  181, 182, 183,  declare  the  nature  and  constitution  of 
and  Chillingworth's  Wks.  vol.  1,  p.  it,  what  its  faith  and  worship,  and 
316.  laws  and  privileges,  are."  Bp.  Sher 

2)  "Whether  there  can  be  any  such  lock,  in  notes  of  the  Church  Examd. 
thing  as  a  church,  or  not,  we  can  only  and  Refuted,  pp.  'J  and  G. 

know  by  the   scriptures."     "Forcer-  Again,  "the  church  is  not  a  natu- 

tainly  the  church  lias  no  charter  but  ral  but  a  mystical  body,  and  therefore 

what  is  in  the  scripture."     "  For  the  its   nature   depends    upon  its  institu- 

chaiter  which  founds  the  church,  must  tion."     Do.  p.  23.     "And  therefore  if 


LECT.    II.]  FOUND    IN    THE   BIBLE.  49 

It  is,  then,  incontrovertibly  plain,  either  that  there  is  no  such 
thing  as  a  church,  or  that  every  thing  essential  to  the  being  of 
that  church,  which  it  is  imperatively  binding  upon  all  her 
members  to  observe  and  follow,  must  be  contained  in  that 
divine  institution  from  which  she  derived  her  origin.  Now  pre- 
lacy asserts  the  absolute  necessity,  to  the  very  being  and  con- 
tinuance of  the  church,  of  a  succession  of  prelates  as  one  of 
three  orders  in  the  ministry ;  and  therefore  is  it  most  manifest 
that  such  a  doctrine,  and  such  an  order  and  orders,  must  all  be 
made  clear  from  this  heavenly  institute.  Otherwise,  though 
the  whole  world  were  against  us,  as  it  was  against  Alhanasius, 
we  abide  by  the  charter,  and  in  the  name  of  its  divine  author, 
the  omnipotent  and  all-wise  God  our  Saviour,  we  hold  in  abey- 
ance all  the  synods,  convocations,  and  oecumenical  councils  which 
may  attempt  to  wrest  from  us  this  title-deed,  signed  and  sealed 
in  the  courts  above.' 

If  such  a  prelatical  succession  is  essential  to  the  true  church, 
so  that  there  cannot  be  a  true,  and  pure,  and  safe  church,  with- 
out it ;  then  would  our  Lord  have  necessarily  "  designated,  in 
express  terms,  that  could  not  be  mistaken,"  the  nature,  order, 
and  character  of  such  succession,  and  by  such  specifications 
on  his  part,  would  have  rendered  any  miraculous  proofs  need- 
less for  our  full  satisfaction.  It  is  only  by  such  a  definitive 
specification  of  this  doctrine,  or  by  the  continued  presence  of  a 
miraculous  agency  bearing  attestation  to  it,  that  christians  in  all 
future  ages  could  have  been  assured  of  the  truth  of  this  funda- 
mental article.  Certainty  on  this  point  was  most  certainly  to 
have  been  expected,  since  the  very  object  of  this  doctrine  is  to 
exclude  all  rival  or  differing  forms  of  polity,  from  having  any 

there  be  any,  they  must  be  instituted  end  of  their  authority."     Archbishop 

notes."     Do.  p.  24.     "  Whatever   in-  Whateley  holds  this  language,  (Dan- 

stitution  makes  proper  and  necessary  gers  to  the  Chr.  Faith,  Lond.,  1839,  p. 

it  makes   essential."     "  And  it  is  car-  ]71) :   "  If  it  were  possible  that  all  the 

tain   there  can  be  no  other  rule   or  christians  now  in  existence  —  suppose 

standard  of  the  church,  but  its  institu-  250  millions  —  could  assemble,  either 

tion  as  to  faith   and  worship    and  go-  in  one  person  or  by  deputations  of  their 

vernment."  respective   clergy,   in   one    place,   to 

"  As  no  covenant  can  originally  be  confer  together ;  and  that  the  votes, 

made  for  God,  but  by    God    himself;  whether  personal  or  by  proxy,  of  230 

it  hence   follows  that    God   only    can  or  240  millions  of  these  were  to  be  at 

make  or  constitute  a  church."      Dan-  variance    (as   in     many   points    they 

bury's  Guide  to  the  Ch.  vol.  l,p.  44.  probably  would  be)  with  the  decision 

1)  Thus  speak  the   authors  of  the  and  practices  of  our  own  church,  we 

Notes  of  the  Church  Examined  and  should  be  no  more  bound  to  acquiesce 

Refuted.  See  p.  9,  6,  23,  24,  &c.     On  in  and  adopt  the  decision  of  that  ma- 

p.  47,  Bishop  Sherlock  says:  "  Should  jority,  even  in  matters  which  we  do 

synods,  and  convocations,  and  cecume-  not  regard  as  essential  to  the  christian 

nical  councils,  determine  that  for  an  faith,  than  we  should  be,  to  pass  a  law 

article  of  faith,  which  is  not  plain  and  for  this  realm,  because  it  was  approved 

intelligible    in    scripture,  they    were  by  the  majority  of  the /mman  race." 
ridiculous  indeed,  and  that  were  an 

7 


50  SILENCE     OF    SCRIPTURE.  [LECT.  II. 

participation  in  the  benefits  of  Christ's  kingdom,  and  all  exer- 
cise of  private  judgment  in  otherwise  interpreting  the  word  of 
God.' 

That  error  cannot  be  fundamental,  even  "  our  enemies  them- 
selves being  judges,"  which  consists  in  the  rejection  of  a  doc- 
trine that  is  only  probably  revealed  by  Christ,  "  while  there  is 
a  probability  that  he  did  not  reveal  it."  "  In  this  case,"  we 
are  instructed,  "  error  is  tolerable. "^  Now,  in  order  to  estab- 
lish against  us,  the  charge  of  wilful  denial  of  a  certain  truth, 
—  which  conduct  is,  we  are  told,  "  heretical,  anti-christian,  and 
destructive  of  salvation,"^ — the  certainty  of  the  revelation  of 
that  truth  must,  of  course,  be  made  apparent. 

When  we  consider,  how  these  church  principles  are  conso- 
nant to  the  pride,  pomp,  and  circumstance,  which  are  so  dear 
to  the  natural  heart4  —  how  perfectly  they  are  in  unison  with 
the  strongest  feelings  and  prejudices  of  the  Jewish  people  — 
and  how  often  the  apostles  manifested  the  outbreaking  of  this 
self-same  spirit  —  we  may  well  feel  assured,  that  had  not  these 
apostles  been  restrained  from  doing  so,  by  a  divine  influence, 
they  would  have  fully  developed,  and  frequently  asserted  them.s 
This  argument  becomes  conclusive,  when,  in  contrast  with  the 
course  pursued  by  the  apostles,  we  consider  the  bombastic  and 
fulsome  exaggeration  with  which  many  of  the  fathers,  and 
later  churchmen,  expend  all  their  force  of  energy  and  of 
eloquence,  in  the  establishment  of  these  — to  them,  all-important 
verities.  But  further:  "no  bishop  —  no  church,"  is  a  current 
maxim  in  the  system  of  prelacy.  Now,  it  is  on  all  hands 
allowed,  that  the  writers  of  the  New  Testament  employed  the 
word  bishop  interchangeably,  and  as  synonymous,  with  the  word 

1)  See  Whateley's  Dangers  to  Chr.  "But,"     to     apply     this    bishop's 

Faith,  Essay  iii.   §   4.     "  Now,"  says  words,  "  has  this  enormous  structure 

Dr    Howe,  (Vind.  of  the    Protestant  a  foundation  of  proportionate  strength  ? 

Episcopal   Church,  p.  361,)  "  nothing  No,  it  has  not  —  none  in  scripture  — 

will  serve  as  a  basis  for  a  divine  insti-  none    in    common   sense   and   sound 

tution  but  an  express  ?oarmn«  of  scrip-  reasoning."   (See  p.  38,  in  the  Tract 

ture  ;  now,  it  is  quite  sufficient  if  the  form.) 

institution  be  capable  of  being  fairly  2)  See  Palmer,  vol.  i.  p.  131. 

proved  from  scripture."  3)  Do.  do. 

Bishop  Onderdonk,  in  his  charge  on  4)  "  But  a  visible  priesthood,  with 

the  rule  of  faith,  remarks :   "that  in  power  and  parade,  officiating  within 

proportion  to  the   magnitude   of  the  the  perimeter  of  holy  rails,  at  altars  of 

structure   should   be  the  strength  of  gold  or  marble,  and  mimicing  medi- 

the    foundation,"  which   is,  says  his  ation  with  divers  well-contrived  cer- 

Roman  catholic   reviewer,  "true    in  emonies  and  shows  of  intercession,  is 

logic  as  well  as  in  architecture."    See  gross  food  for  the  natural  man,  and 

the   Catholic   Miscellany,    March    6,  such  as  his  coarse  palate  does  exceed- 

1841.    He  further  adds,  "  that  without  ingly  relish."  (Beverley's  Heresy  of 

a  clear  and  explicit  scriptural  basis.  Human  Priesthood,  p.  7.) 

the  whole  structure  of  infallibility  can  5)  See  Hinds  on  Inspiration,  p. 

only  rest  on  the  foundation  of  human  79  and  85. 
fallibility." 


LECT.  II.]  MUST   BE   PROVED    FROM    SCRIPTURE.  51 

presbyter.  But  since  the  apostles  gave  very  full  and  explicit 
directions  to  the  churches  they  addressed,  on  all  points  deemed 
important ;  and  were  led  to  do  so  by  the  teaching  of  the  Holy 
Ghost ;  —  it  would  have  been  the  more  necessary  to  guard 
their  readers  against  the  inference  which  must  be  otherwise 
drawn,  as  to  the  identity  of  these  officers.  Prelacy  being 
true,  and  being  of  essential  importance,  we  cannot  imagine  how 
the  apostles  should  have  said  what  they  have  spoken,  and  should 
have  left  unsaid  what  they  might  have  so  easily  declared. 

Christ  commanded  us  to  call  no  man  master  on  earth,  and 
before  submitting,  therefore,  to  this  yoke  of  bondage,  we  must 
be  certified  of  the  authority  by  which  it  is  imposed.  Christ 
represented  his  kingdom  as  divided  into  different  provinces,  un- 
der the  dominion  of  as  many  separate  governors  as  he  then  had 
chosen  ministers,  and  we  ask  where  he  has  reduced  it  to  one 
consolidated  and  absolute  monarchy.^  Christ  is  held  forth  to 
us,  every  where,  as  the  only  head  of  his  church  ;  and  as  carry- 
ing on  all  its  operations  by  his  own  immediate  and  divine  presi- 
dency ;  and  we  ask  where  he  has  consigned  this  sceptre,  and 
intrusted  this  rule,  to  prelates — these  self-styled  successors  of 
the  apostles.^  Christ  commanded  his  ministers  to  go  forth  as 
heralds,  not  as  legislators  —  as  servants,  not  as  masters — as 
teachers  of  what  he  commanded,  and  not  as  enforcers  of  what 
he  commanded  not.  The  Jewish  Rabbis  are  condemned,  for 
making  the  law  of  God,  —  which,  like  prelates,  they  professed 
fully  to  receive  —  of  none  effect  by  those  traditions,  with  which 
they  overlaid  and  obscured  them.  Now  we  must  be  certified 
that  these  prelatical  church  principles  are  not,  likewise,  tradi- 
tions of  the  elders,  and  therefore  to  be  condemned. 

That  which  is  essential  to  salvation,  is  held  forth  in  scripture 
so  plainly  that  the  wayfaring  man,  though  a  fool,  need  not 
err.  Such  truths  are  as  a  city  set  on  a  hill,  toward  which  we 
can  hardly  miss  our  way,  if  sincerely  desirous  to  reach  it. 
They  are  proclaimed  so  openly,  so  unreservedly,  and  so  clearly, 
that  whosoever  belie veth  may  be  saved.  But  these  writers 
would  persuade  us  that  the  main  difference  between  the  Jewish 
and  christian  dispensations,  lies  in  the  difficulty  of  discovering 
the  precise  requirements  of  the  christian  ritual ;  and  that  in- 
stead of  being  a  law  of  liberty,  it  is  a  law  of  severity,  of  con- 
straint, of  formality,  and  of  external  rites.  But  is  this  indeed 
so  ?     "  To  the  law  and  the  testimony."^ 

1)  See  Mark  29,  30.  Christ  being   the  sole  legislator  and 

2)  See  the  Dudleian  Lecture,  by     supreme  head  and  ruler  of  the  chris- 
the  Rev.  John  Tucker,  A.  M.,  Bos-      tian  church." 

ton,  1778.     "The  validity  of  presby-  3)  See  note  C. 

terian  ordination  argued  from  Jesus 


ADDITIONAL  NOTES  TO   LECTURE   SECOND. 


NOTE   A. 


That  we  do  not  overcharge  the  picture,  will  appear  from  the  statement  of 
the  question  as  given  by  its  three  ablest  American  advocates. 

Dr.  Bowden  declares  that  he  has  proved  "  that  diocesan  (his  own  italics) 
episcopacy  is  of  divine  origin."*  "  I  had  proved,"  says  he,t  "  that  bishops 
in  the  third  century  were  diocesan  ;  that  they  were  raised  from  the  presbyter- 
ate  to  the  episcopate  by  a  new  ordination ;  that  they  possessed  the  supreme 
power  of  the  keys  ;  that  they  were  the  sole  ordainers  :  that  they  alone  con- 
firmed ;  that  all  orders  in  the  church  were  subordinate  to  them,  and  that 
bishops  of  this  kind  were  instituted  by  Christ. "t 

The  doctrine  is  thus  laid  down  by  Dr.  Howe  :  t  "  Well,  the  supposition  is, 
that  Christ  established  distinct  grades  of  ministers,  and  conferred  upon  the 
highest  grade  the  exclusive  power  of  ordaining.  When  a  minister  of  the 
highest  grade,  then,  ordains,  Christ  ordains;  when  a  minister  of  the  second 
grade  ordains,  it  is  not  Christ  that  ordains,  but  man.  Thus  episcopal  ordina- 
tion confers  the  sacerdotal  office  ;  presbyterial  ordination  does  not.  If,  there- 
fore, the  former  ordination  be  laid  aside,  and  the  latter  be  substituted  in  its 
place,  the  sacerdotal  office  must  cease  to  exist;  and  as  there  can  be  no  church 
without  a  ministry,  the  church  must  cease  to  exist  also. 

"  Man  can  no  more  make  a  minister  of  Christ  than  he  can  make  a  Bible.  The 
sacerdotal  power  can  come  only  fiom  the  great  Head  of  the  church  ;  and  it 
can  come  from  him  only  in  the  way  of  his  appointment." 

Dr.  Cooke  thus  presents  the  question  :§  '-We  have  express  warrant  for 
saying,  that  there  was  an  order  of  drrgtj  superior  to  presbyters ;  that  their  supe- 
riority rests  on  the  appointment  of  Christ,  and  that  with  this  superior  order 
alone  ivere  deposited  all  the  treasures  of  ministerial  order  and  succession.  More- 
over, that  we  have  the  positive  testimony  of  those  to  whom  this  superior  order 
committed  the  church,  as  their  successors,  that  they,  when  the  church  was 
settled,  dropped  the  name  of  apostles,  messengers,  and,  now  that  they  were 
confined  to  the  oversight  of  the  church  in  one  city  and  the  district  of  country 
surrounding  it,  assumed  to  themselves  the  more  appropriate  name  of  over- 
seers or  bishops^and  continued  to  exercise  the  powers  of  the  superior  order,"|| 
viz.  the  apostolic  order. 

Bishop  Meade,  in  his  sermon  at  the  consecration  of  Bishop  Elliott,  with  a 
particular  reference  to  Arclibishop  Laud,  gives  the  following  outline  of  the 
high-church  doctrines  on  this  subject: 

"1st.  That  before  Jesus  Christ  left  the  world,  he  breathed  the  holy  spirit 
into  the  apostles,  giving  them  the  power  of  transmitting  this  precious  gill  to 
others  by  prayer  and  tlie  imposition  of  hands  ;  that  the  apostles  did  so  trans- 
mit it  to  others  ;  and  they  again  to  others ;  and  that  in  this  way  it  has  been  pre- 
served in  the  world  to  the  present  day. 

*  Letters,  2d  series.  Letter  ii.  p.  18. 

t  Do.  Letter  iii.  p.  -25.     See  also  p.  2fi,  36-    See  also  Works  on  Episcop.  vol.  ii.  p.  68  and  73. 

i  Vind.  of  the  Prot.  Episc.  Oh.  p.  35-1. 

<J  Works  on  Episcop.  vol.  ii.  p.  250. 

U  Washington,  1841,  p.  94. 


NOTES   TO   LECTURE   II. 


53 


"  2d.  That  the  gift  thus  transmitted  empowers  its  possessors,  1st,  to  admit 
into,  and  exclude  from,  the  mysterious  communion  called  iu  scripture  the 
kingdom  of  heaven,  any  one  whom  they  judge  deserving  of  it ;  and  this,  with 
the  assurance  that  all  whom  they  admit  or  exclude  on  earth  and  externally, 
are  admitted  or  excluded  in  heaven  and  spiritually,  in  the  sight  of  God  and 
holy  angels  ;  that  it  empowers  them  to  bless  and  intercede  for,  those  who  are 
within  this  kingdom,  in  a  sense  in  which  no  other  man  can  bless  or  intercede. 
2d.  To  make  the  eucharistic  bread  and  wine  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  in 
the  sense  in  which  our  Lord  made  them  so.  3d.  To  enable  delegates  to  perform 
this  great  miracle  by  ordaining  them  with  imposition  of  hands. 

"  According  to  this  view  of  the  subject,  to  dispense  with  episcopal  ordina- 
tion is  to  be  regarded  not  as  a  breach  of  order  merely,  or  a  deviation  from 
apostolical  precedent,  but  as  a  surrender  of  the  christian  priesthood,  a  rejection 
of  all  the  powers  which  Christ  instituted  episcopacy  to  perpetuate  ;  and  the 
attempt  to  institute  any  other  form  of  ordination  for  it,  or  to  seek  communion 
with  Christ  through  any  non-episcopal  association,  is  to  be  regarded  not  as 
schism  merely,  but  as  an  impossibility." 

In  Nos.  51  and  52  of  the  Oxford  Tracts  we  have  these  strong  expressions  : 
"Christ  never  appointed  two  ways  to  heaven ;  nor  did  he  build  a  church  to  save 
some,  and  make  another  institution  to  save  other  men.  There  is  no  other  name 
given  under  heaven  among  men  whereby  we  can  be  saved,  but  the  name  of 
Jesus,  and  that  is  no  otherwise  given  under  heaven  than  in  the  church." 

NOTE  B. 

On  this  point  a  few  more  references  may  be  made. 

Tliis  matter,  says  Episcopius  in  his  Labyrinth  or  Popish  Circle,  Arg.  vi.,  is 
so  clear,  that  even  the  learned  Jesuit,  Cardinal  Bellarmine,  acknowledges  these 
two  things  :  1  That  the  argument  concerning  succession  is  not  adduced  by 
his  party  to  prove  that  the  church  in  which  this  succession  may  be  found,  is 
on  this  account  to  be  considered  the  true  church,  but  only  to  prove  that  that 
is  not  the  true  church  in  which  such  succession  is  wanting.  2.  That  anti- 
quity and  continued  succession  avail  nothing  to  the  Greek  church,  or  at  least 
to  that  of  Constantinople,  nor  even  to  all  the  eastern  patriarchates,  for  proving 
them  to  be  the  true  church,  because  the  thread  of  legitimate  succession 
among  them  has  been  broken  by  some  of  their  bishops  having  been  heretical. 
From  these  remarks  it  clearly  follows,  that  when  the  succession  is  made  out, 
the  principal  question  respecting  truth  remains  still  to  be  determined.  For 
when  an  uninterrupted  succession  is  proved,  if  it  cannot  be  infallibly  col- 
lected and  concluded  that  the  church  which  has  such  succession  is  the  true 
church;  and  if  it  must  be  rendered  apparent  that  no  heresies  or  heretical 
bishops  have  interposed  in  the  succession  ;  reason  itself  dictates  that  succes- 
sion is  introduced  to  little  or  no  purpose,  unless  we  are  fully  informed  respect- 
ing that  which  constitutes  the  truth  in  doctrine  ;  for  whilst  truth  is  unknown, 
it  is  impossible  to  determine  what  is  or  what  is  not  heresy. 

Of  this  succession,  Turretine  says  it  cannot  be  a  note  of  the  church;* 
"  quid  competit  etiam  falsis  Doctoribus.  Annas  et  Cajaphas  successerunt 
Aaroni  in  sacerdotio,  Scribse  and  Pharissei  succedebant  Patribus  et  Legis 
interpretibus,  Ariani  succedebant  orthodoxis,  Ecclesia  Graeca,  quam  Pontificii 
habent  pro  schismatica  et  hseretica,  successione  non  interrupta  Episcoporum 
ab  apostolis  gloriatur.  Bellarminus  ipse  de  notis  Eccles.  lib.  4,  cap.  8,  sub 
finem,  fatetur,  non  posse  inferri  necessario  Ecclesiam  esse,  ubi  est  successio. 

"  Si  successio  localis  est  nota  ecclesia,  ergo  multae  Ecclesiae  hsereticsB  et 
schismaticse  sunt  verse  ecclesia,  quia  possunt  habere  talem  successionem,  ubi 
falsi  Doctores  succedant  in  loca  et  in  sades  verorum  Pastorum." 

So  also  in  his  treatise,  "  De  Secessione  Necessaria  ab  Ecclesia  Roman  a," 
he  says,t  "  Scribae  et  Pharisaei  succedebant  versis  doctoribus,  qui  tamen 
seductores  evant,  et  veritatis  hostes  acerrimi.  Sic  Ariani,  succedebant  ortho- 
doxis  ;  sec  tenebrae  luci  ;  morbus  sanitati ;  Tyrannus  pio,  principi  succedit." 

See  also  Stapferi  Institutiones  Theologia  Tom.  1,  p.  423,  §  mdxxxvii. 

*  Opera  Tom.  iii.  p.  121,  twice.  t  Op.  Tom.  iv.  p.  216,  217. 


64  NOTES   TO   LECTURE   II. 

That  the  Greek,  Ethiopic,  Syrian  and  other  churches  equally  depend  on 
an  uninterrupted  succession,  see  also  Dr.  Willet,  Syn.  Pap.  pp.  83,  84.  Causa 
Episcop.  Hier  Lucif.  Edinburgh,  170G,  4to.  pp.181,  m^.  Dr.  Fulke  Conf. 
Rhem.  N.T.  on  Eph.  iv.  i:{. 

On  the  claims  of  tlie  Greek  church  and  its  condemnation  of  others,  includ- 
ing the  Romish,  see  Pinkerton's  Transl.  of  Platon's  Summ.  of  Chr.  Div. 
Edinburgh,  1814,  p.  162,  163.  See  also,  Tracts  by  the  ever-memorable  John 
Hales,  of  Eaton.     London,  1727,  p.  210. 

NOTE  C. 

When  we  demand  express  scripture  authority  for  that  which  is  to  be  main- 
tained, as  of  divine  right,  we  do  not  mean  that  the  proposition  is  to  be  discov- 
ered there,  in  so  many  words ;  but  that  if  not  there  in  words,  it  will  be  found 
to  follow  from  its  words,  as  a  clear  and  evident  consequence.  "  It  is  quite 
sufficient,"  to  use  the  words  of  Dr.  Howe,"  if  the  institution  (to  wit,  prelacy) 
be  capable  of  he'ing  fairly  proved  (his  italics)  from  scripture." 

Such  a  clear  and  evident  proof  for  them  as  such,  has  been  ever  required  by 
protestant  writers.  This  rule  of  protestantism  is  thus  expressed  by  Conder, 
in  his  Nonconformity,  vol.  ii.  p.  317  :  "  The  sufficiency  of  the  Bible,  as  a  rule 
of  faith  and  practice,  is  to  be  considered  as  exclusive,  not  of  other  means  of 
rational  guidance,  but  of  all  other  sources  of  authority  in  matters  of  religious 
duty.  It  is  not  implied,  that  nothing  but  what  scripture  commands  is  lawful, 
but  that  nothing  which  scripture  has  not  made  to  be  duty,  can,  as  respects  the 
concerns  of  religion,  be  constituted  our  duty  by  the  authority  of  man.  The 
word  of  God  is  our  only  rule,  in  the  sense  both  of  a  law  and  a  standard  ;  a 
rule  sufficient,  as  opposed  to  all  deficiency  ;  exclusive,  as  relates  to  the  divine 
authority  from  which  it  emanates  ;  universal,  as  embracing  all  the  principles 
of  human  actions  ;  and  ultimate,  as  admitting  of  no  appeal.  For  all  religious 
purposes,  it  is  literally  the  only  rule,  because  the  divine  command  constitutes 
the  only  reason,  as  well  as  the  only  law  of  religious  actions  ;  and  there  can, 
therefore,  be  no  scope  for  other  rules,  except  with  regard  to  the  mere  outward 
circumstantials  of  religious  duties,  which  do  not  come  within  the  obligations 
of  any  law.'" 

This  demand  is  fully  sanctioned  by  Dr.  Bowden,  in  the  following  canon  :* 
"  But  as  there  is  no  probability  that  we  shall  meet  one  another  upon  this  point, 
the  lea.it  1  think  you  can  do,  as  a  reasonable  and  candid  opponent,  is  to  con- 
sider these  texts  as  involved  in  some  degree  of  obscurity ;  and,  therefore,  upon 
every  fair  principle  of  criticism,  not  affording  sufficient  ground  for  either  your 
practice  or  ours.  It  is  conceded  by  all  men  of  sense,  that  no  doctrine  should 
be  founded  upon  a  single  passage  of  scripture,  when  that  passage  is  not  per- 
fectly clear  in  itself;  and  especially  when  there  are  strong  objections  upon 
other  grounds  to  any  particular  sense  given  to  it," 

That  all  things  necessary  to  be  believed,  are  to  be  found  expressly  in  scrip- 
ture, see  taught  by  Hooker,  Eccl.  Pol.  B.  3,  §  2,  vol.  i,  p.  208  and  210,  Han- 
bury's  Ed.  and  B.  3,  §  18. 

When  Elizabeth  required  her  chaplain  to  perform  divine  service  before  a 
crucifix  which  she  kept  in  her  chapel.  Dr.  Cox  wrote  to  her  as  follows  :  "  I 
ought  to  do  nothing  touching  religion,  which  may  appear  doubtful  whether 
it  pleaseth  God  or  not ;  for  our  religion  ought  to  be  certain,  and  grounded 
upon  God's  word  and  will."t 

See  also  Jackson's  Works,  vol.  iii.  p.  890.  Oxf.  Tr.  vol.  i.  42,  46,  48. 
Whateley  on  St.  Paul,  p.  366.  Do.  on  Romanism,  173.  Jeremy  Taylor  in 
Powell,  p.  12.  Dods worth  on  Scripture,  on  p.  12.  Potter  on  Ch.  Govt.  p.  119, 
and  278  and  281;  see  also  p.  27.  Still ingfieet,  Iren,  p.  118.  Stillingfleet, 
Irenic,  Pt.  2,  ch.  i.  p.  1.51. 

See  also  some  good  remarks  in  Dr.  Mitchell's  Letters  to  Bishop  Skinner, 
London,  1809,  Prel.  Disc.  p.  29,  »&c. 

*  Works  on  Episcop.  vol.  p.  153.  t  McCrie's  Life  of  Knox,  vol.  i.  p.  156. 


LECTURE    III. 


THE    TRIBUNAL,    BY    WHICH    THIS    PRELATICAL   DOCTRINE  OF  APOSTOL- 
ICAL   SUCCESSION    MUST   BE    ADJUDICATED. 
THE    SUBJECT    CONTINUED. 

The  question  before  us,  as  fully  stated  in  the  preceding  Lec- 
ture, is  the  prelatic  doctrine  of  apostolical  succession. 

"  The  doctrine  in  dispute  is  this  :  that  Christ  founded  a  visi- 
ble church  as  an  ordinance  forever,  and  endowed  it  once  for  all 
with  spiritual  privileges,  and  set  his  apostles  over  it,  as  the  first 
in  a  line  of  ministers  and  rulers,  like  themselves,  except  in  their 
miraculous  gifts,  and  to  be  continued  from  them  by  successive 
ordination ;  in  consequence,  that  to  adhere  to  this  church  thus 
distinguished,  is  among  the  ordinary  duties  of  a  christian,  and 
is  the  means  of  his  appropriating  the  gospel  blessings,  with  an 
evidence  of  his  doing  so  not  attainable  elsewhere."' 

For  the  truth  of  this  theory,  we  demand  express  and  indubi- 
table sanction  from  the  word  of  God,  the  only  tribunal  by  which 
this  question  can  be  finally  and  authoritatively  settled. 

In  support  of  the  reasonableness  and  propriety  of  this  de- 
mand, we  offered  two  arguments  : 

I.  Such  plain  and  evident  corroboration  is  made  necessary 
by  the  fact,  that  the  claims  involved  in  this  doctrine  were  urged 
by  the  ancient  heretics,  and  are  now  preferred  by  various  bodies 
differing  very  materially  from  each  other.  Of  necessity,  there- 
fore, recourse  must  be  had  to  some  umpire  who  can  decide 
upon  their  respective  claims.  This  umpire  is  the  written  word 
of  God. 

II.  Such  proof  is  necessary  and  reasonable,  because  if  this 
doctrine,  as  is  alleged,  is  of  essential  importance,  then  would  it 
have   been,  as   all  articles  of  fundamental  importance  are,  dis- 

1)  Oxf.  Tr.  No.  74,  vol.  iii.  p.  129. 


66  THE   6TTBJECT   OF   VITAL   IMPORTANCE.  [lECT.    III. 

tinctly  revealed  in  God's  written  word,  and  thus  be  capable 
of  clear  and  certain  proof. 

We  will  now  proceed  to  our  next  position. 

III.  A  third  ground  for  demanding  full  and  explicit  scripture 
authority  for  these  principles,  is,  that  they  constitute  new  terms 
of  communion,  and  that  not  with  any  particular  church,  but 
with  the  church  universal,  which  Christ  alone  is  competent  to 
institute  and  prescribe.^ 

Upon  these  principles,  prelates  not  only  debar  us  from  their 
church,  which  they  may,  but  from  the  church  of  Christ,  which 
they  may  not.  They  not  only  thus  unchurch  us,  but  they  un- 
christianize  us.  They  not  only  cut  us  off  from  the  benefits  of 
episcopalianism  —  whatever  those  may  be — but  they  turn 
away  from  us  every  possible  stream  that  flows  from  the  fountain 
of  salvation.*^  Now,  for  thus  binding  upon  our  shoulders  a 
burden  too  heavy  to  be  borne,  and  for  thus  shutting  the  king- 
dom of  heaven,  so  as  to  leave  us  no  covenanted  possibility  of 
entrance,  we  may  fairly  demand  the  witnessing  impression  of  a 
heavenly  warrant. 

This  conclusion  follows  also  from  the  argument  of  Mr.  Keble, 
one  of  the  most  able  of  the  Oxford  Tractators,  in  his  truly 
Romish  treatise,  (I  mean  in  the  spirit  and  tendency  of  it,)  "  on 
Primitive  Tradition."  He  here  argues  that  the  deposit  com- 
mitted by  the  apostle  to  Timothy  (2  Tim.  i.  14)  contained  "  a 

CERTAIN  SYSTEM  OF  CHURCH  PRACTICE,  BOTH  IN  GOVERN- 
MENT, DISCIPLINE,  AND  WORSHIP."^  Of  course,  therefore, 
since  this  system  was  then  certain  and  perfect,  and  as  far  as 
ascertainable,  is  to  be  by  us  "  retained  and  reverenced,"  we 
having  now  all  that  was  by  the  Holy  Ghost  deemed  necessary 
to  convey  this  certain  system  down  to  the  end  of  time,  in  the 
scriptures,  which  were  afterwards  written  ;  and  in  the  accounts 
there  given  of  the  actual  order  instituted  by  the  apostles  in 
their  churches  ;  must  be  able  from  them  to  learn  this  certain 
system  of  church  practice,  in  government,  discipline,  and  wor- 
ship." The  apostle  evidently  claims,  for  what  he  had  thus 
committed  to  Timothy,  a  divine  right  and  title.  But  if  this 
"certain  system"  was  thus  of  such  supreme  importance,  and 
"  given  by  inspiration  of  God,"  and,  as  such,  committed  to  Tim- 
othy ;  when  the  apostle  was  led  to  write  those  epistles,  which 
"are  for  our  instruction,  on  whom  the  ends  of  the   world  have 

1)  See  Baxter's  True  and  Only  is  asked,  (see  pp.  29,  30,)  "  Is  it  not 
Way  of  Concord.  London,  ]680,  in  the  power  of  men  to  change  the 
Part  1,  ch.  X.  p.  100,  »S:c.  mode  of  governing  the  church.'     No; 

2)  See  Pahner,  vol.  i.  pp.  (58,  71.  because  no  men  have  power  to  change 

3)  In  the  Smaller  Catechism  of  the  permanent  regulations  of  God." 
(the  Roman  catholic)  Bishop  England,  4)  4th  Edn.  1839.    Lond.  p.  21. 


LECT.    III.]         CHURCH   POWER    LIMITED    BY    THE    BIBLE.  57 

come,"  he  must  have  left  on  record,  not  only  "  the  treasure  of 
apostolical  doctrines,"  but  of  "  church  rules,"  and  "  this  cer- 
tain form  and  system  of  church  practice."  And  while  we 
may  allow,  that  during  that  period  of  the  church,  when  these 
divine  scriptures  were  as  yet  unwritten,  and  they  existed  only  as 
communicated  orally  by  the  apostles,  that  oral  teaching  con- 
stituted a  part  of  the  rule  of  faith  and  practice ;  yet  now,  that 
the  canon  of  inspiration  is  completed,  and  is  left  for  our  guid- 
ance, and  as  such  is  universally  received,  we  argue  —  and  we  are 
sustained  even  by  Mr.  Keble  —  that  these  scriptures  are  not  only 
"  a  lest  of  positive  truth,  but  may  also  be  appealed  to  nega- 
tively :  that  is,  their  silence  may  be  quoted,  as  excluding  any 
point  from  the  list  of  truths  necessary  to  salvation."^  So  that 
now  "  every  fundamental  point  of  doctrine  is  contained  in  the 
unquestioned  books  of  that  canon. "^  It  is,  therefore,  as  this 
writer  adds,  "  the  golden  rule  not  of  the  Anglican  only,  but  of 
the  catholic  church,  that  nothing  is  to  be  insisted  on  as  a  point 
of  faith,  necessary  to  salvation,  but  what  is  contained  in,  or 
may  be  proved  by,  canonical  scripture."^ 

The  authority  of  the  church  is  derived  exclusively  from  the 
Word  of  God.  This  is  her  charter  and  her  rule.  By  this  is 
she  astricted  and  compassed  in  all  her  legislation  and  enact- 
ments, so  that  whatsoever  is  beyond,  as  well  as  contrary  to  this, 
cometh  not  of  God.  The  church  can  institute  no  new  office  or 
order,  as  of  divine  authority.^  "  The  assumption  of  authority 
is  lawful  "  only  "  in  the  sense  of  power  conferred  by  Christ  upon 
his  church. "5  "  It  would  also  be  sinful  and  detestable  to  teach 
merely  human  theories  and  opinions,  as  equally  obligatory  on 
the  conscience  of  Christians  with  the  doctrines  of  revelation  ; 
for  God  himself  has  said,  "in  vain  do  they  worship  me,  leach- 
ing for  doctrines  the  commandments  of  men."*  All  true  power 
is  from  God  ;  and  God,  who  has  declared  to  us  his  will  in  the 
revelation  of  truth,  will  not  oblige  us  to  receive  as  such,  any 
the  least  deviation  from  this  only  fountain  of  truth.'' 

"  We  all  grant,"  says  Mr.  Jones,  of  Nayland,  himself  a 
high-toned  prelatisl,  "  in  common  whh  Dr.  Samuel  Clarke, 
that  the  legislative  power  of  the  church  cannot  extend  to  mat- 
ters of  doctrine  :  for  the  power  that  can  make  a  law  can  un- 
make it,  and  then  it  might  follow  that  the  church  might  dis- 
pense with  any  doctrine  of  scripture."^  Either,  then, 
this   whole   subject  of  apostolical  succession  is  a  doctrine,  and 

1)  Keble  on  Primit.  Tradit.  p.  29.  5)  Palmer,  vol.  ii.  p.  304. 

2)  Ibid,  p.  30.  6)  Palmer,  vol  ii.  pp.  110,  111. 

3)  Ibid,  pp.  30,  31.  7)  See  Chillingworlh,  vol  i.p.l09. 

4)  See  Burnet  in  Vindication  of  8)  Rem.  on  the  Conf.  Wks.  vol. 
Ch.  of  Scotland,  p.  355.  ii.  p.  346  and  vol.  iv.  p.  429. 


58  CERTAIN    PROOF   FROM   THE    BIBLE    REQUIRED.      [lECT.  III. 

therefore  beyond  the  legislative  authority  of  the  church,  and 
binding  only  so  far  as  it  can  be  proved  by  scripture ;  or  it  is 
not  a  doctrine,  and  therefore  to  be  ranked  under  the  head  of 
things  indifferent,  and  of  consequence,  not  essential  to  salva- 
tion. 

But  since  the  church  of  Christ  subsists  perpetually  by  the 
same  divine  promises  and  charter ;  that  which  is  foreign  to  the 
constitutional  powers  of  the  church  now,  was  also  unconstitu- 
tional in  every  preceding  century,  up  to  the  very  time  when  her 
high  commission  was  first  issued  ;  and  hence,  at  no  period  of 
her  history,  was  it  competent  for  the  church  to  legislate  author- 
itatively on  matters  of  doctrine.  Of  necessity,  therefore,  it  fol- 
lows, that  at  no  time  past,  present,  or  to  come,  can  this  theory 
of  apostolical  succession  be  a  doctrine,  unless  made  certain  from 
the  divine  charter.  Otherwise,  to  insist  upon  it  as  such,  is  a 
manifest  assumption  of  despotic  rule  in  the  house  of  God. 

Unless,  therefore,  it  can  be  shown,  that  these  high  church 
principles,  which  have  ever  been  "  attended  with  asceticism  and 
superstition,"'  are  so  clearly  borne  out  by  scripture,  that  noth- 
ing may  probably  be  alleged  from  the  sacred  oracles  against 
them,  they  cannot  be  proved  to  be  necessary  doctrines  ;  and 
may  therefore  be  rejected,  "  without,"  as  Chillingworth  says, 
"  any  fault  at  all,"'  or  at  least  without  endangering  salvation  ;  — 
since  those  points  cannot  be  "fundamental  which  are  deducible 
from  scripture,  but  probably  only,  and  not  certainly.'"  We  are 
accused  of  heresy,  because  we  deny  that  these  church  princi- 
ples can  be  discovered  among  the  divine  institutes  —  the  only 
canon  of  infallible  laws  —  and  heresy,  we  are  at  the  same  time 
informed,  "  excludes  from  salvation."*  Now  heresy  is  defined 
by  these  same  divines,  to  be  "  the  pertinacious,  or  obstinate  de- 
nial, of  some  truth  certainly  revealed,"^  (their  own  italics.) 
"  It  is  agreed  generally,  that  pertinacity  or  obstinacy  is  required 
to  constitute  formal  heresy  ;"  and  "  I  add,"  says  the  learned 
Palmer,  "  certainly  revealed,  because  if  there  be  a  legitimate 
doubt  in  a  controversy,  which  of  the  two  contrary  doctrines  was 
actually  revealed,  either  may  be  held  without  heresy."®  These 
doctrines,  consequently,  must  be  shown  to  be  so  certain  as 
to  exclude  any  legitimate  doubt ;  and  further,  to  be  rejected  by 
us  after  having  been  thus  demonstrated  from  scripture ;   before 

1)  Anct.  Chr.,  vol.  i  p.  503.  of  the  Romanists  on  another  question. 

2)  This  point  is  distinctly  argued  4)  Palmer,  vol.  i.  p.  91. 
against   the    Romanists   by  Chilling-  5)  Ibid. 

worth,  vol.  i.  p.  159,  &c.  6)  Palmer,  vol.   i.    p.   92.     This 

3)  Chillingworth,  vol.  i.  p.  IGl.  point  is  also  urged  by  Mr.  Newman 
See  also  p.  215,  where  this  plain  de-  against  the  Romanists,  in  his  lectures, 
termination  of  scripture  is  demanded  See  p.  255. 


LECT.    III.]  PRELACY    ONLY    A    RITE.  59 

this  fearful  charge,  involving  such  awful  consequences,  can,  on 
their  own  principles,  be  excused  from  "  horrible  audacity,  in 
coolly  consigning  entire  communities,  including  the  most  emi- 
nent individuals,  to  eternal  perdition."' 

There  is  still  another  ground  on  which  we  may  urge  the 
necessity  of  this  plain  revelation,  and  expose  the  dilemma  to 
which  these  principles  conduct  their  abettors — if  indeed,  by 
this  test,  they  are  not  "  evaporated  altogether." 

In  his  great  work  prepared  for  the  use  of  theological  students, 
and  designed  to  imbue  their  minds,  not  with  doctrinal  truth,  but 
with  these  high-church  principles,  Mr.  Palmer  most  unequivo- 
cally asserts,  that  "  confirmation,  ordination,  episcopacy,"  &tc., 
are  rites  and  ceremonies,  and  come  under  "  the  discipline"  of 
the  church.*  Now,  "  if  any  rite,"  as  he  further  teaches,  even 
though  "  mentioned  in  scripture,"  was  not  given  by  all  the  apos- 
tles, under  the  express  sanction  of  the  Holy  Ghost;  "  or  not 
delivered  to  all  the  churches  by  the  apostles  ;"  "  then  it  must  be 
regarded  as  designed  only  for  temporary  uses."  Again,  "  if  any 
rite,  or  discipline,  be  not  traceable  in  scripture,  it  cannot  be 
essential  or  invariable."  "  All  rites  which  are  supported  by 
ancient  tradition  only,  might  be  omitted  by  the  church  for  spec- 
ial reasons."  "  All  rites  and  discipline,  whose  early  preva- 
lence may  be  accounted  for  without  apostolic  institution,  or 
which  were  only  received  by  a  portion  of  the  church,  may  be 
omitted."  And  further,  "  those  rites  not  mentioned  in  scrip- 
ture, and  which  are  found  by  experience  to  be  injurious  to 
christian  piety,  in  consequence  of  extreme  abuses  connected  with 
them,  OUGHT  to  be  removed  by  the  church."^ 

Now,  on  each  and  all  of  these  grounds,  do  we  object  to  prel- 
acy, and  to  high-church  principles,  as  being  in  direct  antago- 
nism, in  their  certain  tendency,  to  the  spirit  and  principles  of 
the  gospel.*  And  to  make  these  principles  articles  of  faith,  is 
to  assume  a  greater  power  than  that  exercised  by  God  himself, 

1)  This  is  the  language  of  the  ble,  as  well  in  the  spiritual  as  in  the 
episcopal  author  of  Ancti  Christ'y.  See  material  world.  A  deep  antipathy  re- 
vol.  i.  p.  4r>0,  where  he  shows  that  ciprocally  repels  the  gospki,,  and  a 
"  the  frightful  impiety  of  denying  the  religion  ofasceticism,  superstition,  and 
possibility  of  salvation  to  dissidents"  sacramental  efficiency.  Nf.ver  have 
must  follow  from  these  principles.  the  two  systems  been  combined,  al- 
That  it  is  not  against  faith  to  reject  though  often  they  have  been  tightly 
even  points  fundamental,  unless  suffi-  bound  together  by  stringent  creeds,  in 
ciently  proposed  as  revealed  by  God  is  the  same  church-bundle.  The  epistle 
a  position  taken  by  Romanists,  as  in  to  the  Galatians  turns  entirely  upon 
Chillingworth,  vol.  i.  pp.  33(J,  333  this  irreconcilable  contrariety  between 

2)  See  On  the  Ch.  vol.  ii.  p.  71.  God's   religion    and    man's  religion. 

3)  See  Palmer,  vol.  ii.  pp.  70,74.  Whoever,   therefore,    adheres   to  the 

4)  "  The  laws  of  attraction  and  latter,  finds  himself,  as  if  by  an  irre- 
repulsion  are   universal  and  invinci-  sistible    and    invisible    hand,    drawn 


60  THIS   PROOF  DEMANDED   BY   THE  [LECT.   III. 

since  He  makes  essential,  only  such  points  as  are  really  neces- 
sary to  salvation. 

This  system,  so  far  as  it  stands  distinguished  from  evangelical 
episcopalianism,  is  in  unquestionable  opposition  to  the  entire 
catena  of  the  apostolic,  and  inspired  authors  —  the  true  fathers, 
founders,  and  authorities  of  the  christian  church.  For  such  a 
system,  therefore,  which  is  made  to  stride  the  entrance  to  the 
kingdom  of  heaven,  like  the  cherubim  with  the  flaming  sword  in 
the  garden  of  Eden,  to  be  a  consuming  fire  to  all  presbyterian 
and  other  sectaries,  who  may  venture  to  approach  —  for  this 
system  we  must  demand,  before  submitting  to  it,  the  most  plain, 
palpable,  and  certain  scripture  evidence.^ 

IV.  A  fourth  ground  upon  which  we  stake  the  merits  of  this 
demand,  for  the  most  clear  and  unequivocal  scripture  authority, 
in  support  of  these  exclusive  pretensions  is,  that  it  is  in  accord- 
ance with  the  doctrine,  and  the  spirit  of  Protestantism. 

The  doctrine  of  protestantism  cannot  be  more  satisfactorily 
stated,  than  —  in  the  language  of  an  episcopal  writer,  Mr.  Isaac 
Taylor,  already  quoted,  and  whose  language  we  use  rather  than 
our  own,  because  he  is  an  episcopalian, — "That  no  article  of 
worship,  discipline,  government,  or  opinion,  which,  however 
well  attested  as  belonging  even  to  the  apostolic  churches  of 
the  first  century,  is  nowhere  alluded  to,  or  enjoined,  in  the 
inspired  scriptures,  can  be  binding  upon  the  church  in  after- 
times  ;  for  we  adhere  to  the  belief,  and  on  this  very  ground 
renounce  Romanism,  that,  whatever  our  Lord  intended  to  be  of 
permanent  observance  in  his  church,  he  has  caused  to  be  includ- 
ed in  the  canonical  writings ;  and  secondly,  that  points  so 
attested  as  ancient,  and  yet  very  slightly  or  ambiguously  alluded 
to  by  the  inspired  writers,  are  not  to  be  regarded  as  of  prime 
necessity,  or  insisted  upon  as  conditions  of  communion. 

"  Again,  at  the  present  moment,  the  christian  community,  and 
especially  the  clergy  of  the  episcopal  church,  are  called  upon  to 
make  their  choice  between  apostolic  Christianity,  and  an- 
cient CHRISTIANITY ;  and  this  weighty  alternative  must  soon 
merge  all  other  distinctions,  leaving  only  the  two  parties — the 
adherents  of  the  inspired,  and  those  of  the  uninspired  documents 
of  our   religion."*     "What  we   mean  by  protestantism,"  says 

away  from  the  former :  a  dread  fatal-  river  toward  a  cataract."  Anct.Christ'y. 

ity  pursues  him,  from  step  to  step,  of  vol.  i.  p.  503 

his     course;     he    himself    struggles  1)    See    Rutherford's    Due    Right 

against  what  he  feels  to  be    an  omi-  of  Presbyteries,    Lond.,  1G44,  4to,  pp. 

nous  tendency  ; — lie  wistfully  returns  224,  223,  ch.  iv.  §  r>. 

twenty  times  to  a  point  nearer  to  the  2)  Anct.   Christ'y.   vol.   i.  p.  510 

foot  of  the  cross,  and  as  often  is  borne  and  110. 

away,  as  on  the  bosom  of  a  smooth 


LECT.    111.]  DOCTRINE    OF   PROTESTANTISM.  61 

Mr.  Taylor,  in  his  preface  to  the  Life  of  Luther,  "  can  be  nothing 
less  than  a  renouncing  the  religion  of  man's  contrivance,  and  a 
returning  to  the  religion  which  God  has  revealed ;  and  to  effect 
this  return,  we  must  recede,  not  toward  the  sixth  century,  not 
toward  the  fifth,  nor  toward  the  fourth,  nor  the  third,  nor  the 
second  :  not  to  the  times  of  Polycarp  or  Ignatius  :  not  even  to  the 
age  of  the  apostle  John  ;  but  we  must  go  where  alone  revealed 
religion  is  to  be  found  —  namely,  to  God's  Book."^ 

No  mere  human  power,  whether  civil  or  ecclesiastical,  has 
any  right  or  authority  whatever,  to  make  essential  to  salvation, 
either  the  form  of  church  government,  or  the  manner  of  admin- 
istering its  discipline  and  rites;  so  far  forth,  as  they  are  not 
so  propounded  in  the  Word  of  God.  This  is  that  liberty  where- 
with Christ  has  made  us  free  —  in  which  we  stand  —  and  for  which 
we  mu^t  contend  earnestly,  and  if  needs  be,  even  unto  blood. 
From  those  carnal  ordinances,  in  which  were  prescribed  the  mi- 
nutest detail  of  religious  services  and  ecclesiastical  offices,  we 
have  been  delivered  ;  and  what  should  bewitch  us,  having  been 
once  freed  from  bondage,  to  be  again  enslaved  to  these  weak  and 
beggarly  elements  ?  Were  the  apostle  alive,  he  might  address 
the  abettors  of  such  a  system,  as  he  did  the  Galatians:  "  Ye  ob- 
serve days  and  months  and  time  and  years,  I  am  afraid  of  you." 
Let  us  here  use  the  language  of  that  eminent  episcopalian,  Dean 
Stillingfleet,  in  the  preface  to  his  Irenicura  :  "  Will  Christ  ever 
thank  men  at  the  great  day  for  keeping  such  out  from  commu- 
nion with  his  church,  to  whom  he  will  vouchsafe  not  only  crowns 
of  glory,  but  it  may  be  aureolce  too,  if  there  be  such  things 
there  ?  The  grand  commission  the  apostles  were  sent  out  with, 
was  only  to  teach  uhat  Christ  had  commanded  them.  Not  the 
least  intimation  of  any  power  given  them,  to  impose  or  require 
any  thing  beyond  what  himself  had  spoken  to  them,  or  they 
were  directed  to,  by  the  immediate  guidance  of  the  Spirit  of  God. 

1)  See  the  fundamental  principles  church  of  Rome  was  this, that  christian 

of  the  reformers  well  laid  down  in  Dr.  people  were  not  tied  up  unto  blind  obe- 

Owen's  answer  to  Dr.  Stillingfleet,  in  dience  unto  church  guides,  but    were 

AVks.,  vol.    20,  p.    2d2,    &c.      First.  not  only  at  liberty,  but  also   obliged 

"  The  first  was,  that  the  scripture,  tlie  to  judge   for  themselves,  as   unto  all 

Word  of  God,  is  a  perfect  rule  of  faith  things  that  they   were  to   believe  and 

and  religious  worship  ;  so  as  thatnoth-  practise  in  religion  and  the  worship  of 

ing  ought  to  be  admitted  which  is  re-  God." 

pugnant  unto  it  in  its  general  rule  of  Tliirdly.  Another  principle  of  the 
especial  prohibitions,  nothing  is  im-  reformation  is,  "That  there  was  not 
posed  that  is  not  prescribed  therein,  any  catholic,  visible,  or^anical,  go- 
but  that  every  one  is  at  liberty  to  re-  verning  church,  traduced  by  succes- 
fuse  and  reject  any  thing  of  that  kind."  sion  into  that  of  Rome,  whence  all 
Secondly.  "  The  second  principle  of  church-power  and  order  was  to  be  de- 
the  reformation  whereon  the  reform-  rived." 
ers  justified  their  separation  from  the 


62  POCTKINB  Of  PEOTESTANTISM.  [HCT,   HI. 

It  is  not  whether  the  things  required  be  lawful  or  no  ?  which  I 
now  inquire  after,  (of  those  things  in  the  treatise  itself)  but 
whether  they  do  consult  for  the  churches  peace  and  unity,  who 
suspend  it  upon  such  things?  how  far  either  the  example  of  our 
Saviour,  or  liis  apostles,  doth  warrant  such  rigorous  impositions? 
There  were  great  diversities  of  practice  and  varieties  of  observ- 
ance among  christians,  in  the  apostolic  times,  but  the  Holy 
Ghost  never  thought  those  things  fit  to  be  made  matter  of  laws, 
to  which  all  parties  should  conform.  All  that  the  apostles  re- 
quired as  to  these,  was  mutual  forbearance  and  condescension  to- 
wards each  other  in  them.  The  apostles  valued  not  indifferences 
at  all,  and  those  things  it  is  evident  they  accounted  such,  which, 
whether  men  did  them  or  not,  was  not  of  concernment  to  sal- 
vation. Without  all  controversies,  the  main  inlet  of  all  the 
distractions,  confusions,  and  divisions  of  the  christian  world, 
hath  been  by  adding  other  conditions  of  church  communion  than 
Christ  hath  done." 

These  fundamental  principles  of  protestantism,  that  the  church 
can  never  make  any  thing  to  be  wrong,  but  can  only  declare  or 
hold  forth,  that  which  is  made  wrong  by  the  Word  of  God,^ — 
and  that  it  has  no  authority  to  make  necessary  as  articles  of  faith 
that  which  the  Bible  has  not  made  certainly  necessary,  —  these 
principles  are  held  forth,  as  if  engraven  on  their  fore  front,  by 
all  the  reformed  churches  in  Christendom.'^ 

Luther,  in  his  preface  to  the  Bohemic  confession,  says,  "  Let  us 
remember  that  all  the  rites  and  observances  of  all  churches  never 
have  been,  or  could  be,  uniform  and  alike;  for  the  circumstan- 
ces and  varieties  of  men  do  not  permit  it.  Only  let  the  doctrine 
of  faith  and  morals  be  preserved,  for  this  ought  to  be  the  same." 

Melancthon  says,  "  As  we  agree  respecting  the  chief  articles 
of  christian  doctrine,  let  us  embrace  each  other  with  mutual 

1)  See  Palmer  vol.  ii.  p.  262,  and  nelle,  que  tons  les  serviteurs  de  Dieu 
the  Church  Indep.  of  Civil  Gov't,  p.  doivent  sainctement  entretinir  avee 
62,  by  an  Episcopalian.  les  Protestants  qui  ont  quelque  diver- 

2)  The  reformers  and  later  divines  site,  soil  d 'expression,  soil  de  methode, 
rejected  the  claim  of  uninterrupted  soit  mesme  de  sentiment,  rassembli's 
succession  as  a  mark  of  the  true  en  un  pour  la  consolation  et  confima- 
church.  See  De  Moor  Comment,  tion  des  ames  pieuses,  et  pour  I'in- 
vol.  6,  p  54  ;  Turretini  Opera,  tom.  III.  struction  de  la  posterite,  a  Amsterdam, 
p.  121,  de  Notes  EcclesifE ;  and  tom.  1655,"  4to.  The  clergy  of  England 
iv.  De  Secessione,  p.  210.  For  a  full  receive  even  her  creeds,  as  Bp.  Bull 
and  elaborate  collection  of  the  testi-  testifies,  "  upon  this  ground,  primarily, 
monies  of  the  reformers,  the  reader  —  because  slie  finds  that  the  articles 
is  referred  to  Blondel's  "  Actes  Au-  thereof  may  be  proved  by  most  evident 
thentiques  des  Eglises  Reformees  de  testimonies  of  Scripture."  Vind.  Ch. 
France,  Germanie,  Grande  Bretaigne,  Eng.  §  xxviii.  p.  106.  See  also  Voe- 
Pologne,  Hongrie,  Pais  Bas,  &c.  tius  Desperata  Causa  Papatus,  Amst 
Touchant   la  paii  et    charite   frater-  1635. 


LECT.    III.]  SPIRIT    OF   THE   REFORMERS.  63 

love.     Nor  ought  dissimilitude  and  variety  of  rites  and  ceremo- 
nies to  disunite  our  affections." 

Calvin  did  not  regard  the  peculiarities  of  the  Lutheran  church, 
as  any  just  cause  of  disunion  between  it  and  the  Reformed. 
He  desired  that  the  most  catholic  union  should  subsist  among 
all  the  churches  of  the  reformation,  exclaiming,  "  I  should  not 
hesitate  to  cross  ten  seas,  if  by  this  means  holy  communion 
might  prevail  among  the  members  of  Christ."  In  his  exhor- 
tation to  the  Lutheran  churches,  he  says,  "keep  your 
smaller  differences,  let  us  have  no  discord  on  that  account ;  but 
let  us  march  in  one  solid  column,  under  the  banners  of  the 
Captain  of  our  Salvation,  and  with  undivided  counsels  pour  the 
legions  of  the  cross  upon  the  territories  of  darkness,  and  of 
death." 

Knox  ministered  to  a  church  at  Frankfort,  in  which  a  form  of 
modified  liturgical  service  was  employed. 

"We  do  not,"  says  the  Helvetic  confession,  "by  a  wicked 
schism  separate  and  break  fellowship  with  the  holy  churches  of 
Christ  in  Germany,  France,  England,  or  other  nations  of  the 
christian  world." 

"  For  it  is  of  little  moment,"  says  the  Polish  agreement  at 
the  synod  of  Sendomir  in  1570,  "what  rites  and  ceremonies 
are  employed,  provided  the  fundamental  doctrine  of  our  faith 
and  salvation  be  preserved  entire  and  incorrupt." 

"  In  1614,  at  the  general  synod  held  at  Tonneins,  a  plan  of 
union  was  proposed,  which  was  to  allow  each  of  the  churches 
to  retain  its  independence,  and  its  own  order." 

The  sixth  article  of  the  Church  of  England,  declares  that 
"  whatsoever  is  not  read  in  scripture,  nor  may  be  proved  there- 
by, is  NOT  to  be  required  of  any  man,  that  it  should  be  believed 
AS  AN  ARTICLE  of  THE  FAITH  ! "  Again,  in  article  20th,  after 
the  interpolated  passage,  (as  we  must  regard  it,)  it  is  said,  "  It 
is  not  lawful  for  the  church  to  ordain  any  thing  that  is  contrary 
to  God's  word  written  .  .  .  and  as  it  ought  not  to  decree  any 
thing  against  the  same,  so,  besides  the  same  ought  it  not  to  en- 
force any  thing  to  be  believed  for  necessity  of  salvation." 
Again,  in  the  canon  of  1571,  it  is  enjoined  that  "preachers 
shall  be  careful  not  to  preach  aught  to  be  religiously  held  and 
believed  by  the  people,  except  what  is  agreeable  to  the  doctrine 
of  the  Old  and  New  Testament,  and  collected  from  that  new 
DOCTRINE,  by  the  catholic  fathers  and  ancient  bishops." 

Bishop  Burnet,  in  his  commentary  on  the  thirty-nine  articles, 
very  strongly   contrasts  this  characteristic  of   the    Church    of 

1)  See  these  quoted  on   Schism,  p.  483,  &c. 


64  SPIRIT    OF   THE   REFOEMERS.  [lECT.    III. 

England,  with  "  the  tyranny  of  the  church  of  Rome  ;  which 
has  imposed  the  beHef  of  every  one  of  her  doctrines  on  the 
consciences  of  her  votaries,  under  the  highest  pains  of  anathe- 
mas, and  as  articles  of  faith.'"  This  he  regards  as  "  intolerable, 
because  it  pretends  to  make  that  a  necessary  condition  of  sal- 
vation, which  God  had  not  commanded." 

That  this  was  the  doctrine  of  the  English  reformers,  cannot 
be  doubted.  Thus  Hooper  tells  us,  that  Christ  left  his  will  "unlo 
the  world  in  writing,  by  the  hands  of  his  holy  apostles,  unto 
which  writing  only  he  has  bound  and  obligated  his  church,  and 
not  to  the  writings  of  men."^  "  It  is  mine  opinion  unto  all 
the  world,"  he  adds,  "  that  the  scripture  solely,  and  the  apos- 
tles' church,  is  to  be  followed,  and  no  man's  authority,  be  he 
Augustine,  Tertullian,  or  even  cherubim  or  seraphim."^  ''  The 
church  of  God,  therefore,  must  be  bound  to  no  other  authority 
than  unto  the  voice  of  the  gospel  and  unto  the  ministry  thereof, 
as  Isaiah  saith,  '  seal  the  law  among  my  disciples.'  "  Indeed, 
the  very  first  article  in  the  confession  which  this  bishop  and 
martyr  drew  up,  as  monitory  articles  for  his  clergy,  in  A.  D. 
1551,  is  "  that  none  do  teach  any  manner  of  thing,  to  be  neces- 
sary for  the  salvation  of  men,  other  than  what  is  contained  in 
the  books  of  God's  holy  word."'* 

That  such  also  were  the  sentiments  of  the  earliest  puritans, 
is  made  manifest  from  the  very  first  paragraph  in  the  "  Sacred 
Discipline,"  drawn  up  by  Cartwright,  the  opponent  of  Arch- 
bishop Whitgift.  "  The  discipline  of  Christ's  church,  that  is 
necessary  for  all  times,  is  delivered  by  Christ  and  set  down  in 
the  holy  scriptures  ;  therefore,  the  true  and  lawful  discipline 
must  be  fetched  from  thence  and  from  thence  alone,  and  that 
which  resteth  upon  any  other  foundation  ought  to  be  esteemed 
unlawful  and  counterfeit."^ 

"  We  say,"  says  Cartwright,  "  the  word  is  above  the  church, 

1)  See  Introd.  p.  8.  changed  into  the  body  and  blood  of 

2)  See  in  the  Brit.  Reformers,  our  Saviour,  Jesus  Clirist,  the  form 
vol.  vii.  p.  30.  and   shape   only  not  being  changed. 

3)  Ibid,  p.  23  and  p.  27,  and  again  Which  thing,  if  it  were  most  true,  (as 
at  p.  200  and  220.  they  shall  never  be  able  to  prove  it  by 

4)  "  The  cause  why  I  die,"  said  any  authority  of  the  scripture  or  doc- 
John  Frith,  vpho  was  offered  up  a  tors,)  yet  shall  they  not  so  bring  to 
sacrifice  on  the  altar  of  British  tyr-  pass,  that  that  doctrine,  were  it  never 
rany,  by  the  bloody  hands  of  Henry  so  true,  should  be  holden  for  a  neces- 
Vllf.,  "is  this:  (Price's  Hist,  of  sary  article  of  faith.  For  there  are 
Nonconf  vol.  i.  p.  48.)  for  that  I  can-  many  things,  both  in  the  scriptures 
not  agree  with  the  divines  and  other  and  other  places,  which  we  are  not 
head  prelates,  that  it  should  be  neces-  bound  of  necessity  to  believe  as  an 
sarily  determined   to  be  an  article  of  article  of  faith." 

faith,   and   that  we    should    believe,  5)  In  Neal's  Puritans,  vol.  v.  Ap- 

under   pain   of  damnation,  the   sub-      pendix,  p.  xi 
stance  of  the  bread  and  wine  to  be 


LECT.    III.]  THE    SPIRIT    OF   EARLIER    REFORMERS.  65 

[Eph.  ii.  20,]  then,  surely,  it  is  above  the  English  church,  and 
above  all  these  books  before  rehearsed."  "  The  puritans  con- 
tended for  a  rigid  adherence  to  the  letter  of  apostolic  insti- 
tutions and  practice,  while  Whitgift  maintained  that  a  discre- 
tionary power  was  vested  in  the  rulers  of  the  church,  to  modify 
and  regulate  its  ceremonies.  The  one  appealed  to  the  Word 
of  God,  the  other  to  the  writings  of  the  fathers.  The  one 
required  conformity  to  the  example  of  the  apostles ;  the 
other  obedience  to  the  mandate  of  the  prince." — "  Neither  is 
the  controversy  betwixt  them  and  us,"  say  the  writers  of  the 
Admonition,  "  as  they  would  bear  the  world  in  hand,  as  for  a 
cap,  a  tippet,  or  a  surplice;  but  for  greater  matters,  concerning 
a  true  ministry  and  regiment  of  the  church  according  to  the 
w^ord,  which  things  once  established,  the  other  melt  away  of 
themselves."^ 

This  fundamental  principle  of  the  sole  and  exclusive  suprem- 
acy of  scripture,  as  the  arbiter  and  judge  in  all  controversies, 
and  the  only  fountain  of  authority  and  source  of  necessary 
doctrine ;  was  the  foundation  upon  which  truly  enlightened 
christians,  in  all  ages,  even  the  darkest,  rested  their  confidence 
in  bearing  testimony  against  the  growing  corruptions  of  the 
church.  Thus,  for  instance,  that  eminent  man,  Claude,  metro- 
politan of  Turin,  in  the  ninth  century,  in  his  commentary  on 
the  epistle  to  the  Galatians,  "  with  an  evident  reference,"  says 
Faber,  who  quotes  the  original  words,  "  to  the  state  of  religion 
in  his  own  time,  declares,  that  what  constitutes  heresy,  is  a  de- 
parture from  that  interpretation  of  scripture  which  the  sense  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  demands."  He  remarks,  at  the  same  time, 
"  that  real  heretics,  of  this  description,  are  to  be  found  within, 
as  well  as  without  the  pale  of  the  church."^ 

"  It  is  in  vain,  therefore,"  that  I  may  employ  against  prelates 
what  they  address  to  Roman  catholics,  "  to  adduce  passages 
from  the  fathers,  where  they  speak  of  the  catholic  church  as 
one  communion,  from  which  all  heretics  and  schismatics  are  cut 
off."  "  These,"  says  Mr.  Palmer,  "  do  not  touch  the  question 
whether  the  catholic  church  itself  may  ever  be  divided  in  point 
of  external  communion."  There  is  no  ''  promise,"  he  adds,  "  of 
its  perpetual  and  perfect  external  union,"  and  yet  '•  this  is  what 
Romanists  ought  to  produce  before  they  affirm  the  impossibility 
of  any  division  in  the  church,  or  the  certainty  that  the  catholic 
church  can  only  exist  in  some  one  communion." 

1)  Second  Admon.  in  Price  Hist.  2)  See  Faber's  Albigenses,  p.  313. 

Nonconf.  i.  250,  and  pp.  236,  237,  and  3)  Palmer  on  the  Church,  vol.  i. 

230.  pp.  78,  77,  76. 

9 


66  THE    FATHERS    MUCH    ABUSED.  [LECT.    III. 

Now  claiming,  as  we  do,  but  not  in  exclusion  of  others,  to 
be  one  communion  of  the  catholic  church  ;  before  we  are  cut  off 
from  this  privilege,  some  promise  or  declaration  of  Christ,  by 
which  we  are  excommunicated,  and  by  which  the  church  of 
Christ  is  confined  to  the  one  communion  of  the  prelacy,  must 
assuredly  be  produced. 

The  assumption  that  they  are  the  church,  which  prelatists  so 
frequently  make,  we  interpret  as  arrogance.  Their  retreat 
to  the  authority  of  the  fathers,  we  regard  as  an  avowal  of  the 
fact,  that  they  have  no  sufficient  evidence  from  scripture. 
These  very  pretensions,  thus  built  upon  the  fathers,  the  best  of 
those  very  fathers,  as  we  have  evidence  to  show,  would  most 
sternly  rebuke.*  And  to  such  an  outcry  against  this  tyranny 
over  Christ's  free-born  subjects,  would  be  added  the  loud  and 
unmingled  reprobation  pronounced  upon  it  by  the  fathers  of  the 
English  church,  and  the  noble  army  of  modern  reformers. 
Their  history  informs  us,  that  they  perilled  life,  endured  the 
loss  of  favor  and  of  fortune,  and  suffered  even  unto  death,  that 
they  might  establish  and  perpetuate  the  sole  supremacy  of 
scripture,  and  the  inalienable  right  of  appealing  from  the  deci- 
sion of  man  to  the  judgment  of  God,  as  the  only  test  of  the 
purity  and  the  perfection  of  our  faith  ;  the  only  infallible  rule 

1)  Upon  the  authority  which  is  tion.   In  proving  them  to  have  grossly 

claimed  for  the   early  christian  wri-  perverted  the  gospel,  and  to  be  among 

ters,  Mr.  Isaac  Taylor  remarks  :  the   worst   guides  which  the  church 

"  It  would  be  doing  an  injury  to  the  can  follow,  we  are  driven  to  the  ne- 

reputation    of   the     illustrious     men  cessity  of  producing  evidence  which 

whose  writings  are  in  question,  if  we  no  motive  less  imperative  would  have 

were  to  speak  as  if  they  had  claimed,  led  us  to  bring  forward.     The  same 

in  their  own  behalf,  any  such  power  happens  in  every  analogous  instance  ; 

to  interpret  scripture  despotically ;  or  to   thrust  a  man  into  a  position  not 

to  legislate  for  the  church  in  all  fol-  due  to  him,  is  to  expose  him  to  the 

lowing  ages.     They  do  no  such  thing.  peril  of  being  treated  ignominiously. 
Whatever  may  have  been  their  faults,  "  Let  it  then  be  clearly  understood 

this  impiety  is  not  of  the  number.     It  that,  in  vigorously  contending,  as  we 

is  altogether  the  product  of  the  wicked  shall,  for  the  paramount  and  unshared 

despotism  of  a  late  age.     None  do  the  authority  of  the  inspired  writings,  and 

fathers   so  grievous   a   wrong  as   do  in  demonstrating  that  the   strongest 

those   modern  champions  of  church  and  most  peremptory  reasons  of  fact 

principles  who  are  attributing  to  them  as  well  as  ■principle,  forbid  the  attempt 

an  authority  which  they  themselves  to  conjoin  the  records  of  the  ancient 

religiously    disclaim.      Who   are  the  church  with  them  ;  we  are  at  war,  not 

enemies  of  the  fathers  .''  the  men  who  with  the  men  whose  writings  are  in 

now  are  thrusting  them,  by  violence,  question,  but   with  those  ill-advised 

and  against  their  solemn  protest,  into  champions  of  church  power,  in  modern 

Christ's  throne.  times,  who  have  put  these  writings  in 

"The   harsh    treatment    to   which  the  room  of  God's  word.  Itisthemod- 

these  good  but  greatly  erring  men  must  ern  mystery   of  wickedness,  not  so 

unavoidably  be  exposed,  in  the  rude  much  the  ancient  error,  which  we  are 

struggle  which  is  yet  before  us,  for  laboring  to  overthrow. "Anct.Christ'y. 

rescuing  apostolic  Christianity,  cannot  vol.  ii.  Eng.  edit, 
but  do  an  injury  to  their  just  reputa- 


LECT.   Ill,]       THIS   PROOF   REQUIRED    BY    OUR   OPPONENTS.  67 

of  faith  and  practice.  "  The  Bible  and  the  Bible  alone,  is  the 
rehgion  of  protestants."  "  The  religion  of  the  protestants  is 
the  Bible.  The  Bible,  I  say,  the  Bible  only,  is  the  religion  of 
protestants.  Whatever  else  they  may  believe  besides  it,  and 
the  plain,  irrefragable,  indubitable  consequences  of  it,  well  may 
they  hold  it  as  a  matter  of  opinion  ;  but  as  a  matter  of  faith 
and  religion,  neither  can  they  with  coherence  to  their  own 
ground  believe  it  themselves,  nor  require  the  belief  of  it  from 
others,  without  the  most  high  and  schismatical  presumption.'" 

V.  We  therefore  make  this  appeal,  fifthly,  on  the  ground,  that 
the  right  and  privilege  to  demand  it  is  not  only  recognized  by 
the  fathers  of  the  reformation,  and  by  all  the  reformed  churches, 
but  is,  as  has  been  already  in  part  shown,  a  right  admitted  and 
acted  upon  whenever  needed,  by  our  opponents  themselves. 

However  far  high-church  prelates  may  be  disposed  to  carry 
their  sacerdotal  claims  of  exclusive  prerogative  and  authority, 
against  those  whom  they  denominate  dissenters  ;  yet  are  they 
obliged,  in  coming  into  collision  with  the  Romish  church,  to  fall 
back  for  protection,  into  this  fortress  of  scriptural  supremacy. 
Nor  do  they  even  decline  to  make  such  a  retreat,  when  hard 
pressed  by  the  force  of  some  one  of  those  protestant  arguments, 
which  may  be  termed  —  to  use  a  military  phrase  — invincibles. 

If,  therefore,  we  require  the  most  clear,  irrefragable,  and  indu- 
bious scripture  proof,  for  this  divine  right  of  prelates,  and  for  this 
passive  obedience  of  all  but  the  favored  few  ;  they  will  them- 
selves teach  us  how  to  frame  our  apology.  Thus,  in  arguing 
against  the  great  protestant  doctrine  of  private  judgment, 
(which  we  had  supposed  was  now  a  received,  and  not  a  dispu- 
ted truth  among  protestants,)  Mr.  Newman  asks  :  "  Can  any 
one  text  be  produced,  or  any  comparison  of  texts,  to  establish 
the  very  point  in  hand,  that  scripture  is  the  sole,  necessary  in- 
strument of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  guiding  the  individual  christian 
into  saving  truth. '"^  Now,  surely,  to  say  the  very  least,  it  is  as 
important  to  establish,  by  such  positive  scripture  evidence,  the 
divine  right  of  prelacy,  as  the  coordinate  authority  of  tradition. 

Take  a  second  illustration,  from  another  Coryphaeus  among 
modern  high-church  writers.  Mr.  Palmer,  in  arguing  against 
popular  election,  as  sufficient  to  constitute  any  man  a  minister, 
says  :  "But  the  grand,  and  unanswerable  proof  of  its  unscriptu- 
rality,"  is  the  fact,  confessed  by  the  most  ardent  advocates  for 
such  election,  that  "  no  case  occurs  in  the  inspired  history, 
where  it  is  mentioned  that  a  church  elected  its  pastor.     This 

1)  Cliillingworth's  Wks.  vol.  i.  2)  On  Romanism,  p.  199. 

ch.  7,  §  56. 


68  ALL   ESSENTIAL   TRUTHS   IN   SCRIPTURE.  [LECT.    III. 

fact,"  says  he,  "  is  undeniable,  and  it  is  conclusive."  Now,  in 
the  same  way  we  argue,  if  there  is  any  passage  in  scripture,  by 
which  prelates  are  empowered  with  all  the  prerogatives  now 
claimed, —  and  this,  loo,  as  a  hereditary  right,  to  be  carried  down 
by  personal  descent,  to  perpetuity  —  let  it  be  shown  ;  or  other- 
wise we  must  aflirm  that  this  very  silence  of  scripture  is  a  con- 
clusive and  unanswerable  proof  against  them  ;  "  for  it  is  not  to 
be  supposed,"  says  this  same  writer,  "  that  scripture  would  omit 
all  notice  of  the  very  cssejitials  of  the  christian  ministry."' 

"  How  is  it  possible,"  asks  Bishop  Taylor,  "  that  the  scrip- 
tures should  not  contain  all  things  necessary  to  salvation,  when, 
of  all  the  words  of  Christ,  in  which,  certainly,  all  necessary 
things  to  salvation  must  needs  be  contained,  —  there  is  not  any 
one  saying  preserved  but  in  scripture  alone."'  "  An  opinion," 
says  Mr.  Newman,  ''  which,  in  addition  to  the  indirect  evidence 
resulting  from  the  foregoing  remarks,  seems  to  be  sanctioned  by 
the  concluding  words  of  St.  John.'" 

But  still  further,  when  we  demand,  that  the  evidence  thus  to 
be  produced  from  scripture,  shall  not  be  constructive,  and  in- 
ferential merely  ;  we  are  sustained  in  this  position,  by  Bp.  On- 
derdonk  himself,  who  in  his  tract  on  this  subject  affirms,  that 
"  against  the  taking  for  granted  any  mere  hypothesis,  all  sound 
reasoning  protests."*  He  further  says,  "  the  right  of  these  elders 
(or  presbyters)  to  govern  and  ordain,  cannot  be  claimed,  as  re- 
sulting from  construction  or  implication,"  since  "nothing  of  im- 
plication can  be  valid  here."^  Now,  if  this  is  true  of  the  claims 
instituted  by  presbyters ;  it  must  be  equally  true  as  applied  to 
the  assumptions  of  prelates,  since  their  exclusive  supremacy 
cannot  be  deduced  from  construction  or  implication. 

If  prelacy,  therefore,  as  Mr.  Palmer  teaches,  is  to  be  ranked 
under  the  head  of  rites  and  ceremonies,*  then  it  cannot  be 
made  a  fundamental  doctrine  ;  nor  of  the  substance  of  the  faith. 

1)  Palmer,  on  the  Church,  vol.  i.  principle  contended  for  —  and  urg-es 
p.  171.  the  very   demand    we   press.     In   his 

2)  Dissuasive,  part  2.  B.  1,  §  2.  Vindicalion  of  the  Church  of  England, 

3)  On  Romanism,  p.  365 ;  see  Bishop  Bull  alleges  it  as  one  of  the 
aJso  pp.  oGG,  367.  errors  and  corruptions  of  the  church 

4)  Episcopacy  tested  by  Scripture,  of  Rome,  that  she  maintains  "  that  all 
in  Works  on  Episcopacy,  p.  424.  things  necessary  to  be  known  and  be- 

5)  Ibid.  p.  432.  We  cannot  refer  lieved  unto  salvation,  are  neither  in 
to  a  stronger  exhibition  of  our  position  express  terms  or  by  necessanj  conse- 
in  all  its  fullness  and  in  every  par-  quence,  delivered  and  contained  in 
ticular,  than  to  Bishop  Onderdonk's  the  holy  scriptures  ;  and  that  there 
charge  on  the  Rule  of  Faith,  forming  is  need  of  the  tradition  of  the  church, 
Tract  No.  67,  of  tlie  Protestant  Epis-  as  a  supply  in  this  case."  Oxf.  ed., 
copal  Tract   Society.     See  especially  p.  10. 

pp.  38,  30,  where   he   argues  against  6)  See  Palmer  on  Ch.,  vol.  2,  p. 

infallibility  —  lays   down     the   very      71. 


LECT.    III.]  ALL  ESSENTIAL   TRUTHS    IN   SCRIPTURE.  69 

If,  on  the  other  hand,  it  is  a  necessary  article  of  faith  and  of  fun- 
damental importance  ;  then  it  cannot  be  so  regarded  without  ex- 
plicit scripture  warrant.'  On  the  contrary,  to  make  that  a  nec- 
essary doctrine,  which  scripture  does  not  make  necessary ;  is, 
we  are  told,  "  sinful  and  detestable  in  the  sight  of  God  ;"  for 
says  Mr.  Palmer,  "  the  church  of  Christ  would  be  apostate,  if 
it  taught  positively  what  was  false  in  faith,  or  contrary  to  the 
gospel  of  Christ."^  Those  who  reject  such  articles  when  made 
necessary,  were  those  articles,  in  their  proper  degree  of  rela- 
tive importance  even  scripturally  true,  "are  neither  heretics  nor 
schismatics  in  the  sight  of  God,  and  are  therefore  in  a  state  of 
salvation."^  ^ayj  we  are  still  further  taught,  that  many  things 
may  be  "  theologically  and  absolutely  true,"  and  yet  "  not  prop- 
erly articles  of  faith,  necessary  to  salvation,  because  they 
involve  questions  of  fact  and  of  human  reasoning  which  are  not 
self-evident,  and  on  which  men  may  be  divided  without  doubt- 
ing the  doctrine  of  revelation  itself."^ 

"  The  pure  word  of  God  "  in  short,  "  means  the  doctrine 
CERTAINLY  REVEALED  by  Jesus  Christ,  neither  mutilated  nor 
corrupted;"'  and  if  any  body  of  men,  be  they  prelates  of  the 
English  or  of  the  Roman  school,  "  should  be  guilty  of  such 
rejection  or  contradiction,  and  obstinately  persist  in  them,  it 
would,"  says  Mr.  Palmer,  "  be  apostate  and  cease,  ipso  facto,  to 
be  a  church  of  Christ."^  In  arguing  against  the  Romish  doctrine 
of  the  unity  of  the  church,  as  implyins;  union  under  one  spiritual 
jurisdiction  or  government  of  any  kind,  Dr.  Barrow  also  says,  "  It 
is  reasonable  that  whosoever  claimeth  such  authority,  should, 
for  assuring  his  title,  show  patents  of  his  commission,  manifestly 
expressing  it ;  how  otherwise  can  he  justly  demand  obedience, 
or  any  with    satisfaction  yield  thereto  ?"'' 

"  It  was  just  that  the  institution  of  so  great  authority  should 
be  fortified  with  an  undoubted  charter,  that  its  right  might  be 
apparent,  and  the  duty  of  subjection  might  be  certain." 

"  If  any  such  authority  had  been  granted  by  God,  in  all  like- 
lihood it  would  have  been  clearly  mentioned  in  scripture;  it  being 
a  matter  of  high  importance  among  the  establishments  of  Chris- 
tianity, conducing  to  great  effects,  and  grounding  much   duty."^ 

1)  See  in  proof  Newman  on  Rom.  3)  Ibid,  vol.  1,  p.  109,  and  see  p.86. 
pp.  2-25  and  260.     Palmer,   vol.   2,  p.              4)  Palmer,  vol.  2,  p.  262. 

74,  Obj.    iv.,  and   vol  1,    p.  92,  and  5)  Ibid,  vol.  1,  p.  45. 

vol.  2,  p.  32:!,  3G2;  Keble  on   Tradi-  6j  Ibid,  vol.  1,  p.  64.     That  the 

tion,  p.  30  and  p.  74  and  77,  4th  ed.  church  has  authority  only  in   things 

Sententia  Johann.   Davenantii    Epis-  indifferent,  see  also  Jones  (of  Nayland) 

copum  Sarisburiensem  Cantab.  1640,  Works,  vol   4.  p.  429,    and    vol.  2,  p. 

pp.  9, 22,  30,  3.5,  in  the  Old  South  Ch.  346. 

Lib.     Also  his  Ashortatio,  &c.,  cap.  7)  Works,  vol.  1,  fol.  edit.  p.  771, 

ii.  p.  49.     In  ibid,  p.  45.  2d  and  5th. 

2)  Palmer,  vol.  2,  p.  110,  111.  8)  See  ibid,  p.  551. 


70  THE    JUDGMENT    OF    THE    ENGLISH   CHURCH.        [lECT.    III. 

We  arc  thus  particular  in  illustra:ting  the  fact,  that  in  arguing 
with  Romanists,  or  upon  any  other  important  subject  than  the 
powers  of  the  ministry,  churchmen  avouch  to  be  true  and  valid, 
the  doctrine  we  have  laid  down;  because  in  reference  to  this 
subject  of  prelacy  as  being  jure  divino  —  such  a  demand  for  a 
distinct,  certain,  and  clear  revelation  in  the  word  of  God,  has 
been  generally  denied.  The  appeal  to  scripture,  as  the  only 
standard  by  which  the  merits  of  this  question  can  be  tested,  has 
been  set  aside  for  the  decisions  of  councils,  and  of  fathers.  And 
as  this  is  a  point  of  great  practical  importance  —  and  goes  far  to 
invalidate  the  theory  in  question,  we  will  here  present  unanswer- 
able evidence  for  its  truth,  reserving  some  further  testimony,  for 
the  concluding  argument  under  this  branch  of  our  subject. 

Archbishop  Whitgift  explicitly  avows  it  as  his  opinion,  that 
the  question  was  not  whether  "the  platform  of  discipline  "  drawn 
up  by  the  puritans  "  were  fitly  used  in  the  apostles'  time  — 
but  may  now  well  be  used  in  sundry  reformed  churches.  This," 
says  he,  "  is  not  denied.'"  He  maintained,  that  "  though  the  holy 
scriptures  were  a  perfect  rule  of  faith,  they  were  not  designed 
as  a  standard  of  church  government  and  discipline  ;  but  that  this 
was  changeable  and  might  be  accommodated  to  the  civil  govern- 
ment we  live  under  ;  that  the  apostolic  government  was  adapted 
to  the  church  in  its  infancy,  and  under  persecution,  but  was  to  be 
enlarged  and  altered  as  the  church  grew  to  maturity  and  had  the 
civil  magistrate  on  its  side."^  "The  diversity  of  our  times  from 
the  apostles,  requires  a  diverse  kind  of  government  and  of  ordain- 
ing of  ministers."^ 

That  this  was  the  early  judgment  of  the  English  church,  Dr. 
Willet  affirms.''  "  The  third  opinion  is  between  both  ;  that  al- 
though this  distinction  of  bishops  and  priests,  as  it  is  now 
received,  cannot  be  directly  proved  out  of  scripture,  yet 
it  is  very  necessary  for  the  policy  of  the  church,  to  av^oid 
schisms,  and  to  preserve  it  in  unity.  Of  this  judgment  Bishop 
Jewel  against  Harding  showeth  both  Chrysostom,  Ambrose,  and 
Hierome  to  have  been.^  And  among  the  rest,  Hierome  thus 
writeth,  "  Apostolum  perspicue  docere  &c."  that  the  apostle 
teacheth  evidently  that  bishops  and  priests  were  the  same ;  yet 
he  holdeth  this  distinction  to  be  necessary  for  the  government 
of  the  church.     "  Quod  unus  post  electus  est,  qui  coeteris  prae- 

\)  See  quoted  in  Neal's  Puritans,  Saravia's  Priesthood,  Oxf.  1840,  p.  5. 
vol.  1,  p.  240.     Mr.    Keble   denomi-  2j  Ibid,  p.  237,  and  p.  405. 

nates     VVhitnriil  "  the     church's    de-  3)  Whitgift  Def.  of  the  answer  to 

fender,"  see  Primitive  Tradition  p. 102.  the  Admon. 
He   is    also  called     "the   Cliurcli  of  4)  Syn.  Pap.  p.  273.  fol. 

England's  watchful  patron."  Pref  to  o)  Defens.  Apolog.  j).  24^. 


LECT,  TTI.]        THE    JUDGMENT    OF   THE    ENGLISH   CHURCH. 


71 


poncretur  in  schismatis  factum  est  remedium.  That  one  after- 
wards was  chosen,  to  be  set  over  the  rest,  it  was  done  to  be  a 
remedy  against  schism/  To  this  opinion  of  S.  Hierome,  sub- 
scribeth  Bishop  Jewel  in  the  place  before  quoted,  and  another 
most  reverend  prelate  of  our  church  in  these  words,"  hc.^ 


1)  Ep.  Ad  Evag. 

2)  We  will  here  add  some  other 
authorities.  Dr.  Willet,  in  his  great 
work  against  "  Papistrie,"  says,  (Syn. 
Pap.,  p.  2G(5,)  "  As  for  the  names  and 
offices  of  sub-deacons,  readers,  exor- 
cists, acolythi,  door-keepers,  we  have 
no  such  warrant  out  of  the  scripture, 
to  make  them  orders  of  the  church  : 
and  therefore  we  condemn  them.  All 
necessary  orders  for  the  edifying  and 
building  of  the  church  the  scrip- 
ture hath  prescribed.  (Eph.  iv.  11.) 
There  are  all  offices  set  down  needful 
for  the  doctrine,  instruction  and  edi- 
fying of  the  church.  (Fulk.  Eph.  iv. 
§  4.)  Wherefore  away  with  these 
popish  orders  invented  by  men.  But 
as  for  other  offices  and  services,  which 
shall  be  thought  meet  for  the  atiairs 
and  business  of  the  church,  they  may 
be  retained  and  kept,  but  not  as  new 
orders  of  the  ministry." 

Hooker"  aknowledges  that  these 
controverted  points,  belong  to  the 
outward  things  of  the  church  and  not 
to  its  being.  (Eccl.  Pol.  B.  3,  §  1, 
vol.  1,  p.  194.)  That  there  were  dif- 
ferent forms  in  the  apostle's  days. 
(Ibid,  vol.  l,pp.3C,  37.)  And  that  the 
evidence  of  scripture  on  the  subject  of 
episcopacy  is  doubtful.  (Ibid,  vol;  1, 
pp.  30,  33.)  And  while  it  is  asserted 
in  the  book  of  Common  Prayer,  that 
these  orders  are  clear  to  all  who  dil- 
igently read  holy  scripture,  Hooker 
shews  that  this  whole  subject  is  entire- 
ly beyond  the  reach  of  ordinary  men. 
(Ibid,  vol.1,  pp.  2G,  27.)  He  makes  it 
out  that  no  form  of  church  government 
is  taught  in  scripture.  (Eccl.  Pol.  B, 
3,  §  2,  vol  1,  pp.  207,  212,  and  B.  3, 
§11.)  That  various  forms  may  be 
equally  consonant  to  it.  (Eccl.  Pol. 
B.  3,  §  2,  vol.  1,  p,  208.  And  that 
this  is  not  among  the  things  essential 
at  all.  (Ibid.  B.  3,  §  2,  vol.  1,  pp. 
208,  210,  211,  212.) 

*  "  Perhaps  there  is  no  work,"  says  Bish- 
op White,  in  allusion  to  the  Ecclesiastical  Po- 
lity "which  from  the  circumstances  conneclf!il 
with  it,  has  so  goorl  pretensions  to  bo  consid- 
ered as  evidence  of  the  opinions  of  the  leading 
churchmen  of  the  period."  Lect.  on  the  Ca- 
techism, Philad.  1813,  p.  42C. 


Bishop  Warburton  thus  speaks  of 
Hooker:  (Controv.  Tracts,  p.  4G7,  as 
quoted  in  Meth.  Quart.  Rev.,  1841,  p. 
78  :)  "  The  great  Hooker  was  not  only 
against,  but  laid  down  principles  that 
have  entirely  subverted  all  pretences 
to  a  divine  unalterable  right  in  any 
form  of  church  government  whatever. 
Yet  strange  to  say,  his  work  was  so 
unavoidable  a  confutation  of  puritani- 
cal principles,  which,  by  the  way, 
claimed  their  presbytery  as  of  divine 
right,  that  the  churchmen  took  ad- 
vantage of  the  success  of  their  cham- 
pion, and  now  began  to  claim  a  divine 
right  for  episcopacy  on  the  strength  of 
that  very  book  that  sulverted  all  pre- 
tences to  every  species  of  divine  right 
whatsoever." 

Thus  says  Dr.  Hammond  :*  (Pow. 
of  Keys,  in  Pref  Oxford  Tracts,  vol. 
3,  p.  1441:)  "  Who  were  the  apostles' 
successors  in  that  power,  which  con- 
cerned the  governing  their  churches 
which  they  planted  ?  and  first,  I  an- 
swer, that  it  being  a  matter  of  fact,  or 
story,  later  than  the  scripture  can 
universally  reach  to,  it  cannot  be  fully 
satisfied  or  answered  from  thence  ;  but 
will,  in  the  full  latitude,  through  the 
universal  church  in  these  times,  be 
made  clear  from  the  recent  evidences 
that  we  have,  viz.,  from  the  consent 
of  the  Greek  and  Latin  fathers,  who 
generally  resolve  that  bishops  are 
those  successors." 

Bishop  Heber  also  teaches,  that  Jer- 
emy Taylor  erred  in  this  respect,  and 
that  the  claims  of  prelacy  are  not  to  be 
based  on  the  arguments  from  scripture, 
(see  Taylor's  Work's,  Heber's  ed. 
and  Life,  vol.  1 ,  pp.  18j ,  183,  and  186.) 
but  on  "apostolical  tradition"  which 
is,  says  he,  "  the  strong,  and  if  I  may 
be  allowed  the  expression,  the  impreg- 
nable ground  of  the  episcopal  scheme." 
"It  happens, however, "he  further  says, 
(Serm.  in  Engl.  No.  12,  p.  250,  Am. 
Ed.)  "  to  be  in  our  power  to  show,  if 
not  an  explicit  direction  of  Christ  for 
the  form  of  our  church  government  and 

*  "  Hammond's  name  alono,  were  there  no 
other,  binds  us  to  the  Englisli  church,"  &.c. 
Oxf.  Tr.,  vol.  3,  p.  3. 


72 


THE    JUDGMENT    OF   THE    ENGLISH   CRUTtCH.        [lECT.  III. 


Rusliworth  informs  us,  that  in  his  days,  (he  wrote  in  the  year 
16l8,)''prelacy  was  ahnost  universally  held,  by  the  prelates  them- 
selves, to  be  a  human  ordinance,  which  may  therefore  be  altered 
or  abolished,  in  cases  of  necessity,  without  wronging  any  man's 
conscience.'"  Thus,  in  the  famous  debate  with  the  parliament 
divines,  in  1648,  King  Charles  allowed,  that  bishops,  as  "  succes- 
sors of  the  apostles  in  all  things  not  extraordinary,  such  as  teach- 
ing, and  governing,  —  are  not  mentioned,  as  a  distinct  order, 
in  the  New  Testament;"  while,  on  the  other  hand,  these  divines 
were  of  opinion,  "  that  human  testimony  on  both  sides  ought  to 
be  discharged,  and  the  point  in  debate  be  determined  only  by 
scripture — and  since  your  majesty,"  say  they,  "  cannot  produce 
any  record  from  scripture,  warranting  the  division  of  the  office 
of  teaching  and  governing  into  two  hands,  we  must  look  upon 
it  as  an  invention  of  men,  to  get  power  into  their  hands. "^  "His 
majesty  in  reply,"  relies,  as  he  says,  "on  the  numerous  testimo- 
nies of  ancient  and  modern  writers,  for  the  scripture  original  of 
bishops ;"  while  he  modestly  insists,  at  the  same  time,  that 
"  testimonies  from  those  fathers,  even  of  an  equal  number,  to 
the  contrary,  are  of  no  value  whatever."^ 


the  manner  of  appointing  our  spiritual 
guides,  yet  a  precedent  so  clear, 
and  a  pattern  so  definite,  as  can  leave 
little  doubt  of  the  intentions  of  our  di- 
vine master,  or  of  the  manner  in  which 
those  intentions  were  fulfilled  by  his 
immediate  and  inspired  disciples." 

Bishop  Tomline  (see  Elem.  of 
Theol.  vol.  ii.  pp.  376,  401,  and  427., 
declares,  that  "  as  it  has  not  pleased 
our  Almighty  Father  to  prescribe  any 
particular  form  of  civil  government 
tor  the  security  of  temporal  comforts 
to  his  rational  creatures,  so  neither  has 
he  prescribed  any  particular  form  of 
ecclesiastical  polity  as  absolutely  neces- 
sary to  the  attainment  of  eternal  hap- 
piness, &c.  The  gospel  only  lays 
down  general  principles,  and  leaves 
the  application  of  them  to  men  as  free 
agents.  Faith  and  good  works  are  the 
only  things  indispensably  required  for 
salvation."  And  again  :  "JVetf/ter 
Christ  nor  his  apostles  prescribed  any 
particular  form,  of  ordaining  ministers, 
to  be  observed  in  succeeding  ages ; 
but  they  left  this,  with  other  things 
of  a  similar  nature,  to  be  regulated  by 
the  church."  See  also  Paley's  Works, 
vol.  G,  p.  91. 

1)  SoquotedinNeal,vol.2,p.49C. 

2)  Neal's  Puritans  vol.  I,  pp.  423. 
430. 


3)  Neal's  Puritans,  p.431,  and  Life 
of  Alexander  Henderson.  Dr.  Pusey 
would  not  allow  us  any  greater  favor 
in  our  investigation  of  the  fathers  even 
could  we  feel  at  liberty  to  receive  their 
testimony  as  authoritative.  In  his  pre- 
face to  the  Library  of  the  Fathers,  and 
in  treating  upon  their  proper  use,  he 
says, — (Li.  of  Fath.  vol.  l,p.xvii.xviii.) 
"  The  end  then  of  this  study  is  not  dis- 
covery of  new  truth,  for  new  truth 
there  is  none  in  the  gospel;  not  any 
criticism  of  their  own  church,  this 
were  irreverent  and  ungrateful ;  not 
to  see  with  their  own  eyes,  for  they 
will  come  to  see  with  their  own  eyes, 
but  not  by  making  this  their  object;  not 
to  compare  ancient  and  modern  sys- 
tems and  adopt  the  one  or  the  other,  or 
amalgamate  both,  taking  of  each  what 
seems  to  them  truth  ;  this  were  to  sub- 
ject the  truth  of  God,  and  the  authority 
which  he  has  placed  over  them,  to  their 
own  private  judgment;  it  is  not  criti- 
cism of  any  sort,  no  abstract  result  of 
any  sort,  nor  even  knowledge  in  itself, 
but  to  understand  and  appreciate  better 
and  realize  more  thoroughly  the  estate 
to  which  God  has  called  them,  as  mem- 
bers of  that  branch  of  the  church  cath- 
olic, into  which  they  were  baptized, 
and  in  which,  perhaps,  they  have  been 
or  look  to  be,  made  his  ministers." 


LECT.  III.]    PRELACY  MUST  BE,  YET  IS  NOT,  FOUND  IN  6CKIPTURE.      73 

In  like  manner,  we  find  in  a  recent  article  on  the  "  Use  of  the 
Fathers,"  in  a  standard  high-church  periodical,  a  re-assertion  of 
this  principle.  "  We  wish,"  says  the  reviewer,  "  this  humble 
effort  might  first  of  all  direct  the  eyes  of  churchmen  to  see 
where  the  hidden  power  of  the  Church  of  England  lies,  that  her 
defenders  may  not  go  forth  to  the  contest,  with  armor  that  they 
have  not  proved,  nor  rob  themselves  of  those  essential  graces, 
which  are  to  them,  not  the  works  of  comeliness,  but  the  se- 
cret of  their  strength."^ 

That  episcopacy  cannot  be  substantiated  from  scripture  alone, 
is  also  the  general  doctrine  of  the  Oxford  divines  in  their  celebra- 
ted works.^  "  We  do  not  find  the  origin  of  episcopacy  exactly 
recorded,"  says  Mr.  Palmer,^  "but  it  is  probable,"*  he  adds. 
"Everyone  must  allow,"  say  the  tractators  themselves,  that  there 
is  next  to  nothing  on  the  surface  of  scripture  about  these  (i.  e. 
these  church  doctrines,)  and  very  little  even  under  the  surface, 
of  a  satisfactory  character."' 

"  If  we  were  to  take  the  several  articles  of  what  is  called 
church  doctrine,"  says  the  author  of  Ancient  Christianity,  him- 
self an  episcopalian,  "in  the  order  and  under  the  perspective  in 
which  we  find  them,  where  only  we  do  find  them  at  all, — 
namely,  in  the  extant  remains  of  the  early  church,  —  for  if  we 
give  up  these  records,  we  have  no  other  sufficient  warrant  for 
paying  them  any  regard "* 

"The  claims  of  episcopacy  (prelacy)  to  be  of  divine  institu- 
tion, and  therefore  obligatory  on  the  church,  must  rest,  how- 
ever," as  we  have  proved  by  the  admissions  of  some  of  these 
writers  themselves,  and  as  Bishop  Onderdonk  expressly  avows, 
"  fundamentally  on  the  one  question  —  has  it  the  authority  of 
scripture  ?  If  it  has  not,  it  is  not  necessarily  binding.  No 
argument  is  worth  taking  into  the  account  that  has  not  a  palpable 
bearing  on  the  clear  and  naked  topic  —  the  scriptural  evidence 
of  episcopacy,"  i.  e.  prelacy. 

And  so,  in  entering  upon  his  treatise  on  the  different  degrees  of 
the  christian  priesthood,  Hadrian  Saravia  says,^  "  I  seek  not  to 

"  This  indeed  is  the  greatest  practi-  concurrent  voice  of  antiquity  as  the 

cal  end  of  the  study  of  the  fathers — not  sure  guide  to  all  fundamental  truth." 
to  prove  any  thing,  not  to  satisfy  our-  2)  See  Oxford  Tr.  vol.  4.  Tr.  81, 

selves  of  any  thing,  but  to  bring  more  p.  1. 
vividly  home  to  our  own  thoughts  and  3)  Vol.  2,  p,  382. 

consciousness    the    rich    treasures   of  4)  Ibid,  p.  383. 

doctrine   and   decoration,   which  our  5)  See  also  other  quotations  from 

church  has  from  their  days  brought  them  in  Ancient  Christianity,  vol.  i., 

down  for  us."  p.  211. 

1)  See  British  Critic,  Jan.  1838,  p.  6)  Ibid,  pp.  242,  243. 

47.     The  writer  then  speaks  of"  the  7)  See  p.  19,  Oxf  edit.  1840. 

10 


74  OUE    ONLY   DEMAND,    AND    CHOICE.  [LECT.  III. 

be  believed  beyond  what  is  expressly  declared  in  the  word  of 
of  God,  or  may  be  proved  from  it  by  the  clear  deduction  of 
reason.'" 

This,  then,  is  the  only  demand  which  we  prefer.  Chris- 
tianity, whatever  it  implies,  is  our  choice.  The  scriptures, 
whatever  they  make  necessary,  are  our  rule,  —  the  truth,  as  it 
is  herein  revealed; — the  whole  truth,  as  by  these  oracles  it 
is  proclaimed  ;  —  and  nothing  beside,  beyond,  or  in  superaddi- 
tion  to  that  truth.  Episcopacy  proved  by  scripture  —  to  this  we 
are  ready  humbly  and  implicitly  to  bow;  —  while  any  thing  but 
this,  we  as  resolutely  disclaim.  The  system  of  the  apostles  — 
as  distinct,  and  distinguishable,  from  the  church  principles  of  an 
after-age  ;  —  Christianity  as  opposed  to  pharasaic  religionism  ;  — 
the  gospel  as  contrasted  with  hierarchical  traditions  ;  —  the  de- 
crees of  God,  in  their  wide  separation  from  the  impositions 
and  burdensome  canons  of  innumerable  councils :  this  is  the 
foundation,  without  any  intervening  stratum  of  human  authority, 
upon  which  we  build.  All  pharisaism,  Judaism,  Nicenism,  and 
Romanism,  kindred  and  identified  as  they  are,  in  all  essential 
principles,  we  disavow.  All  such  "  ecclesiastical  pretensions," 
which  lead  their  authors  to  the  avowal,  that  "  we  know  nothing 
from  revelation  of  any  grace,  any  christian  ministry,  any  sacra- 
ments, or  any  salvation,  beyond  the  church,""  (i.  e.  of  the  prel- 
acy) —  we  must  regard  as  "  adding  the  guilt  of  outrageous  im- 
piety to  the  sin  of  schism."^ 

1)  "  No    fact  can  be  established  p.  38,  in  Evang.  Mag.  vol.  9,  p.  562. 

by  reasoning  solely;  whatever,  then,  See  also  p.  31,  and  pp.  40,  41,  42,  to 

hath  been  reasoned  by  the  ingenuity  57. 

and  research  of  men  contending  for  2)  Palmer,   vol.  ii,   p.  431,   and 

parity,  is  of  no  moment  until  the  fact  436. 

be   previously  established   by  proper  3)  Ancient  Christianity,  vol.  i.  p. 

evidence."    Bish.  Ravenscroft's  Vind.  488. 


LECTURE   IV. 


THE    TRIBDNAL,    BY    WHICH    THIS    PRELATICAL    DOCTRINE    OF  APOSTOL- 
ICAL   SUCCESSION    MUST    BE    ADJUDICATED. 

THE    SUBJECT    CONCLUDED. 

We  now  resume  the  discussion  of  the  prelatical  doctrine  of 
apostohcal  succession.  This  doctrine  is  thus  defined  by  Bishop 
Beveridge  :^  "  In  the  first  place,  I  observe,  how  much  we  are 
all  bound  to  acknowledge  the  goodness,  to  praise,  magnify,  and 
adore  the  name  of  the  most  high  God,  in  that  we  were  born  and 
bred,  and  still  live  in  a  church,  wherein  the  apostolical  line  hath, 
through  all  ages,  been  preserved  entire,  there  having  been  a 
constant  succession  of  such  bishops  in  it,  as  were  truly  and  prop- 
ly  successors  to  the  apostles,  by  virtue  of  that  apostolical  impo- 
sition of  hands,  which,  being  begun  by  the  apostles,  hath  been 
continued  from  one  to  another,  ever  since  their  time,  down  to 
ours.  By  which  means,  the  same  spirit  which  was  breathed  by 
our  Lord  into  his  apostles  is,  together  with  their  office,  trans- 
mitted to  their  lawful  successors,  the  pastors  and  governors  of 
our  church  at  this  time  ;  and  acts,  moves,  and  assists  at  the 
administration  of  the  several  parts  of  the  apostolical  office  in  our 
days,  as  much  as  ever.  From  whence  it  follows,  that  the  means 
of  grace  which  we  now  enjoy  are  in  themselves  as  powerful  and 
effectual  as  they  were  in  the  apostles'  days,"  hc.^ 

If  this  doctrine  is  essential,  and  the  powers  assumed  by  it  are 
necessary  to  the  origination  and  perpetuation  of  a  true  church  on 

1)  Serm.   on    Christ's    Presence      when  you  were  consecrated  to  be  an 
with  his  Min.  in  Wks.  vol.  ii.  apostle."     Keble  on  Trad'n.  p.  10,  in 

2)  "  That  fountain  of  supernatu-      ref.  to  Timothy, 
ral  grace  which  was  opened  for  you 


76  SUPERNATURAL   EVIDENCE   REQUIRED.  [lECT.  IV. 

earth,  then  must  it  be  susceptible  of  proof  from  holy  writ, 
as  clear  and  undeniable  as  any  other  article  of  fundamental 
importance.  That  such  clear  and  positive  evidence  must  be 
given  by  the  abettors  of  this  system,  we  have  shown,  first, 
from  the  fact  that  various  and  opposing  claimants  set  forth  the 
same  pretensions,  and  there  must  be  some  tribunal  by  which 
their  claims  may  be  determined.  Secondly,  if  this  doctrine  is  a 
fundamental  one,  then  it  must  be  found  clearly  laid  down  in  the 
Word  of  God.  Thirdly,  as  the  doctrine  is  made  to  constitute  a 
term  of  communion  with  the  Catholic  church,  since  Christ 
alone,  as  the  head  of  the  church,  is  competent  to  institute  such 
terms,  therefore  must  it  be  shown  that  Christ  instituted  this. 
Fourthly,  we  urged  this  demand  for  positive  scripture  proof,  on 
the  ground  that  such  a  claim  is  in  perfect  accordance  with  the 
doctrine  and  the  spirit  of  protestantism.  And,  fifthly,  we  made 
this  appeal,  on  the  ground  that  the  same  requisition  is  urged 
whenever  needed,  by  our  opponents  themselves. 

VI.  A  sixth  ground  upon  which  we  require  this  unques- 
tionable scripture  authentication  of  this  doctrine  is,  that  before 
allowing  to  the  fathers  —  the  decisions  of  councils  —  and  the  prac- 
tice of  the  church,  an  authority  co-ordinate  with,  or  authorita- 
tively interpretative  of,  the  Bible ;  that  authority  must  be  sub- 
stantiated by  evidence  of  no  less  weight  than  that  which  is 
given  for  the  Word  of  God. 

If  a  secondary  authority  is  to  be  admitted,  by  which  the  pri- 
mary is  to  be  directed  how  to  speak,  when  to  speak,  and  for 
whom  to  speak ;  and  by  which  its  plainest  declarations  are  to  be 
pronounced  obscurest;  and  its  obscurest  hints  proclaimed  as  the 
plainest  and  most  binding  edicts ;  and  by  which  no  meaning  can 
be  put  upon  any  of  its  most  evident  relations,  but  what  is  sanc- 
tioned and  allowed  by  this  interpreter  ;  then  is  it  at  once  mani- 
fest, that  what  is  thus  nominally  the  secondary  authority,  is  in 
reality  the  primary,  the  supreme,  and  the  only  authority  ;  and 
that  what  is  denominated  the  primary  source  of  authority,  is  of 
no  authority  whatsoever.  The  scriptures,  in  this  view  of  them, 
instead  of  being  the  source  of  authority,  are  subsidiary  to  no 
other  purpose  than  the  introduction,  the  exaltation,  and  the 
glorification  of  the  church  —  that  is,  the  prelates  of  the  church; 
for,  from  the  church,  as  thus  considered,  the  unofficered  laity 
are  entirely  excluded.  They  have  neither  voice,  authority,  or 
interference  in  the  whole  matter.  Their  duties  and  their  privi- 
leges are  summed  up  in  the  one  word,  obedience. 

Now,  if  the  universal  consent  and  agreement  of  fathers, 
councils  and  churches,  (if,  indeed,  such  a  pure  fiction  were  even 
conceivable,  much  less  ascertainable,)  —  if  this  is  to  be  the  rule 


LECT.  IV.]     THE  PRELATIC  CHURCH  INDEFECTIBLE.  77 

by  which  we  are  to  ascertain  the  true  meaning  and  intent  of 
God's  word ;  the  true  acts  of  the  apostles  ;  the  real  polity  of  the 
apostolic  churches;  the  unquestionable  prerogatives  of  the  hier- 
archy ;  and  the  assured  duty  of  implicit  subjection  to  their  sacer- 
dotal sway;  —  then,  most  plainly,  is  the  Bible  set  aside,  as  to 
any  practical  value  it  is  of;  so  that  it  might  as  well  be  actually 
kept  secreted,  or  altogether  withheld.  For,  no  possible  informa- 
tion can  be  acquired  from  it,  except  through  the  interpretations  of 
the  church;  and  the  adoption  of  any  different  interpretation  incurs 
the  fearful  risk  of  schism,  heresy,  and  apostacy  from  "  the  obe- 
dience of  the  faith." 

Romanists  only  claim  for  their  church,  an  authority  equally 
infallible,  and  co-ordinate  or  concurrent,  with  that  of  the  Bible  ; 
—  but  prelatists  demand  for  the  church,  an  authority  "  inde- 
fectible"  in  itself;'  by  which  alone,  any  meaning  shall  be 
attached  to  this  revelation  of  God  —  and  without  which,  any 
such  explanation  of  it,  is  a  breaking  loose  from  the  anchorage 
of  sound  catholicity,  and  a  venturing  forth  upon  the  shoreless 
ocean  of  interminable  error.  The  Bible  is  thus  a  revelation 
made  for  the  special  benefit  of  the  clergy  of  the  prelacy ;  and 
not  a  revelation  made  to  man.  It  is  a  gift  to  the  church,  and 
not  to  the  world.  It  is  a  code  of  laws,  of  which  they,  the 
clergy,  are  to  be  the  sole  judges,  interpreters,  and  executors ; 
and  in  which  the  laity  have  no  interest,  other  than  is  made 
known  to  them  by  the  clergy. 

Now,  if  this  is  so,  we  may  surely,  without  arrogance,  demand, 
"  by  what  authority  "  these  prerogatives  are  sustained ;  and 
"what  signs,  and  wonders,  and  mighty  works,"  carry  to  our 
minds  the  evident  impress  of  divine  sanction?  Suppose  these 
claims  —  involving,  as  it  is  avowed  they  do,  fundamental  doc- 
trines, which  are  essential  to  salvation — to  be  established;  as 
they  are  not,  and  cannot  be  ;  but  suppose  them  to  be  established 
by  patristical  authority,  and  that,  therefore,  as  is  also  affirmed, 
they  must  be  apostolic.  That  doctrine,  or  article  of  faith, 
whch  is  apostolic,  is  inspired  ;  for,  it  is  only  what  the  apostles 
gave  to  the  churches,  under  the  guidance  of  inspiration,  that  is 
divine,  and  of  binding  force  upon  the  conscience.  These  doc- 
trines, therefore,  are  doctrines  of  inspiration,  or  else  they  are 
not  of  binding  authority.  If  heaven's  mercy  is  limited  by  the 
boundaries  of  the  existing  prelacy,  then  this  fact  can  be  made 
known  to  us  only  by  revelation ;  for  it  cannot  surely  be  ascer- 
tained by  uninspired  men.     We   conclude,  therefore,  that  since 

1)  "  He  (i.  e.  Christ)  as  our  Media-  tlie  Prot.  Episcop.  Tr.  Soc.  p.  9.  See 
tor,  is  God,  and  so  he  has  made  his  also  Newman's  Lecture  on  Roman- 
CHURCH  INDEFECTIBLE."    Tr.  158,  of     ism,  p.  232,  &c. 


78  8UPERNATT7RAL  PROOF   REQUIRED.  LECT.    IV.] 

inspiration  implies  supernatural  assistance,  and  nothing  short  of 
miracles  or  prophecy  can  constitute  its  supernatural  proof — 
this  evidence  must  be  given  before  receiving  as  apostolic,  the 
church  polity  and  doctrines  framed  by  councils,  fathers,  and 
the  gradual,  and  altered  practice  of  the  early  church.*  If 
"the  church,"  as  is  asserted,  "has  a  supernatural  gift,  for  the 
purpose  of  transmitting  the  faith ;"  so  that  it  is  made  true,  "  be- 
cause she  teaches  it  ;"^  then  what  we  ask  her  to  give  us,  is 
supernatural  proof  for  these  supernatural  claims. 

The  propriety  of  this  demand  is  admitted  by  the  Roman  (pre- 
latical)  church,  "  who  are  fond  of  arguing  that  the  perform- 
ance of  miracles  is  a  sign  of  the  true  church."*  Such  miracles 
are  pretended  to,  not  only  by  the  Roman,  but  by  the  oriental 
church.^  This  claim,  Mr.  Palmer  also  does  not  reject  as  un- 
reasonable,^—  but  allows  that  there  is  every  "  probability,  nay 
certainty,  that  such  signs  have  been  wrought  since  the  time  of 
the  apostles."®  Now  the  line  of  demarcation  between  documents 
which  are  authoritative,  and  such  as  are  unauthoritative,  how- 
ever otherwise  valuable  and  instructive,  is  that  drawn  between 
those  which  are  "  attested  by  miracles,  and  all  without  excep- 
tion not  so  attested.'"  Making  appeals  of  the  same  kind, 
therefore,  to  the  one,  as  to  the  other,  —  to  man  and  to  God  — 
is  giving  the  glory  of  Jehovah  to  another — canonizing  the 
writings  of  fallible  men —  and  thus  making  the  word  of  God  of 
none  effect,  through  vain  ti'aditions.^  And  to  have  recourse  to 
such  self-constituted  prophets,  is  to  provoke  God  to  give  us  up 
to  believe  a  lie. 

If  this  principle  was  so  acknowledged  in  the  Nicene  age,  as 
that,  in  support  of  the  church  principles  and  practices  then  estah- 

1)  See   Hinds   (of  Queen's    Col-      (judgment  ?)  was  continually  recog- 
lege,  Oxford)  on  Inspiration.  nized  in  tlie  church  of  England  during 

Mr.   Newman,  in  his  argument  for  the    whole    reformation,   and    always 

the    "  indefectibility    (infallibility)    of  afterioards."     Again,  in  vol.  ii.  p.  xv. 

the   church,"  says,  "  we   must  have  he   shows   their   agreement  with  the 

recourse  to  such  sources  as  will  ena-  synod  of  Trent,  so  that  when  it  taught 

ble   us  to  agree,  and    such,  I   would  "  the   christian    truth  and    discipline 

contend,  is  ecclesiastical    antiquity  ;"  are  contained  in  unwritten  traditions, 

"  and  the  evidence  of  its  being  apos-  also,"  he  says,  "  we  admit  it." 
tolic  is   in  kind  the   same  as  that  on  4)  Palmer  on   the   Ch.   vol.  i.  p. 

•which  we  believe  the  apostles  lived,  141 ,  142 ;  also  Dr.  Rosbury  in  Notes 

labored,   and    suffered."  See   on  Ro-  of  the  Ch.  Ex.  and  Ref.  p.  279. 
manism,  p.  232  and  p.  233.  5)  Ibid,  p.  143. 

2)  Newman    on    Romanism,    p.  0)  Ibid,  p.  145. 

233.  7)  Hinds  on  Inspiration,  p.  185. 

3)  Palmer,  vol.  i.  p.  499,  says  :  "  It      See  from  p.  174. 

is  evident,  then,  that  the  authority  of  7)  Ibid,  p.  1S4. 

catholic  tradition,  and  of  the  univer-  8)  See  Ancient  Christianity,  vol. 

sal  church,  as  opposed  to  the  unlim-  i.  p.  347,  «&.c.  et  passim. 

ited   freedom   of   private   inventions, 


LECT.  IV,]  SUPERNATURAL   EVIDENCE    REQUIRED.  79 

lished  —  although  these  were  in  glaring  contrariety  to  the  word 
of  God  —  such  miraculous  evidence  was  freely  boasted  ;'  — 
and  if  such  gifts  are  proclaimed  also  by  the  existing  hierarchy  of 
the  Romish  church ;  then  on  what  principle  can  it  be  denied  by 
those  other  inheritors  of  apostolic  powers  and  gifts,  who  assert 
their  identity  with  the  church  of  the  Nicene  age  ? 

"  For,  moreover,"  says  Archbishop  Whateley,  "  we  must  not 
(if  we  would  profit  by  the  examples  of  Christ  and  his  apostles) 
refer  the  people,  as  a  decisive  authority,  on  the  essential  and 
immutable  points  of  Christian  faith  and  duty,  to  the  declarations 
or  decrees  of  any  class  or  body  of  fallible  men  ;  of  any  who 
have  not  sensibly  miraculous  proofs  of  inspiration  to  appeal  to. 
Whether  it  be  to  a  council  or  to  a  church,  that  reference  is 
made  ;  whether  to  ancient  or  to  later  christian  writers  ;  whether 
to  a  great  or  to  a  small  number  of  men,  however  learned,  wise, 
and  good,  —  in  all  cases  the  broad  line  of  distinction  between 
inspired  and  uninspired,  must  never  be  lost  sight  of;  and  (if  we 
would  profit  by  what  Christ  and  his  apostles  have  taught  us) 
we  must  neither  make,  nor  admit,  claims  to  inspiration,  unless 
supported  (as  theirs  were)  by  miraculous  proofs."^ 

But  even  were  this  requisition  set  aside  as  extravagant,  — 
though  to  those  whose  eternal  destiny  is  to  be  decided  by  it  as 
by  the  Lord,  it  must  appear  no  more  than  what  is  reasonable  — 
we  are  still  called  upon  to  heave  off  from  us  the  imposed  yoke 
of  patristical  authority,^  by  the  very  fact  that,  once  beyond  the 
region  of  inspiration,  we  find  "no  end,  in  wandering  mazes  lost." 
There  is,  confessedly,  no  certainty  as  to  the  practice  of  the 
universal  church,  after  the  time  of  the  apostles.  This  is  al- 
lowed by  Eusebius,  the  primitive  historian  of  all  that  can  be 
known,  and  affirmed  by  Joseph  Scaliger  and   other  learned  in- 

1)  See  Anc't  Christianity,  vol  .i.  tem  of  tradition  and  churnh  authority, 
p.  347,  &c.  et  passim.  is  to  obliterate  the  boundary  line  of 

2)  Whateley's  Dan.  to  the  Christ.  distinctive  evidence  betvs^een  the  New 
Faith,  p.  130,  and  see  the  whole  of  Testament  and  the  fathers  and  coun- 
the  subsequent  discussion.  cils  ;  between  the  apostles  and  their 

That    this    system,    requiring    im-  successors   to   the    present   day.      In 

plicit  faith   in  its  teaching,  as  much  this   view,   both    are    placed    on    the 

as  in  the  scriptures  themselves,  must  same   footing ;  both  must  be  equally 

therefore  produce   the  same  miracu-  inspired  and  divine ;  or  (we  have  the 

lous  evidence,  is  also  most  ably  argued  alternative)    both  equally   uninspired 

by  Professor  Powell,  in  his  Tradition  and  human." 

Unveiled,  pp.  29,  34,  36,  39,  40.    Nay,  3)  See  Life  of  Henderson,  p.  638. 

this  evidence  is  actually  claimed,  for  4)  On  the  obscurity  of  ecclesias- 

it  is  said  "  the  lives  and  deaths  of  the  tical  history,  at  the  very  period  when 

great  framers  of  the  articles  attested  a  most  needed,!,  e.  the   first  ages,  see 

supernatural  assistance."     Sewell  on  Scaliger,  Silenus,  Potavius,  and  Stil- 

Subscription,  in  Ibid,  p.  31.  lingfleet,  in  Ayton's  Constit.  of  the 

"  Thus,"  says  Mr.  Powell,  on  p.  38,  Ch.  p.  480.     Hegesippus  in   Euseb. 

"  the  manifest  consequence  of  the  sys-  1.  3,  c.  29- 


so 


FATHERS  NO  AUTHOHITY. 


[LECT.  IV. 


quirers.  It  is  just  as  easy  to  quote  these  early  writers  on  the 
one  side  of  this  question  as  on  the  other  —  against,  as  for  the 
prelacy.'  There  is  among  them  an  endless  diversity  and  confu- 
sion. And  we  believe  this  latter  "  confusion  of  tongues  "  has 
been  as  wisely  ordered  as  was  that  of  Babel.  The  descend- 
ants of  Noah  (as  is  supposed)  proposed  to  themselves  to 
make  such  a  provision  as  should  render  them,  in  any  future 
deluge,  independent  of  divine  assistance.  Exactly  similar  is 
the  attempt  now  making  to  raise  such  a  pile  of  human  authori- 
ties, as  may  enable  its  architects  to  dispense  with  the  Word  of 
God,  as  completely  as  they  of  old  proposed  to  dispense  with 
any  future  ark.  The  attempt  is  equally  presumptuous,  and  its 
result  will  equally  frustrate  the  expectations  of  its  authors.^ 


1 )  "  It  has  happened ,  that  from  the 
beginning  of  the  second  century,  in 
which  Ignatius  wrote,  until  towards 
the  end  of  it,  the  works  of  all  the 
christian  authors  are  lost,  except  a 
few  fragments  found  in  other  authors 
of  later  dates,  and  except  the  apolo- 
gies and  decalogues  of  Justin  Martyr, 
who  has  said  nothing  which  makes 
for  the  one  side  or  the  other  of  the 
present  question."  Bishop  White's 
Lect.  on  the  Catech.  Philadelphia, 
1813,  p.  453. 

Between  these  two  periods,  who  can 
prove  that  prelacy  was  not  introduced  .' 

That  the  testimony  of  fathers  is  of 
no  possible  value  towards  a  final  and 
authoritative  determination  of  this 
question,  is  conclusively  shown  by  the 
evidently  contrary  interpretations  put 
upon  them  by  opposing  parties,  and 
by  the  evident  purpose  of  high-church 
never  to  permit  the  fathers  to  speak  a 
word  in  contrariety  to  their  views. 
"  From  all  these  circumstances,"  says 
Dr.  Bowden,  (Letters,  second  series. 
Works  on  Episc.  vol.  ii.  p.  49,)  "  it 
necessarily  follows,  that  you  have 
either  mistaken  the  meaning  of  Je- 
rome, or  that  he  contradicts  himself. 
If  the  former,  you  derive  no  aid  from 
him,  he  is  altogether  on  our  side.  If 
the  latter,  he  is  not  worth  a  straw 
TO  either  party." 

"  But,"  says  Dr.  Bowden,  (Works 
on  Episc.  vol.  ii.  p.  76,)  "suppose  the 
scriptures  to  be  doubtful  on  this  point, 
what  will  the  weight  of  the  fathers  be 
then.'  I  answer, absolutely  decisive; 
their  testimony  removes  the  doubt  at 
once,  for  they,  and  they  only,  are  the 
persons  to  whom  we  can  appeal." 


Of  what  use,  then,  can  an  appeal 
to  the  fatiiers  be,  if,  as  Dr.  Bowden 
affirms,  "  I  have  maintained  and  do 
now  maintain,  that  the  scriptures 
alone  are  sufficient  to  prove  the  apos- 
tolic institution  of  episcopacy." 

"  For,"  says  Dr.  Rice,  (Evang. 
Mag.  vol.  X.  p.  358,)  "  on  the  supposi- 
tion that  we  can  search  the  records  of 
the  primitive  church,  how  far  do  these 
terms  reach  .''  They  include  the  first 
four  general  councils ;  that  is,  they 
reach  450  years.  But  in  going  through 
the  records  of  this  period,  we  find 
something  to  favor  Congregationalism  ; 
more  to  support  presbyterianism  ;  and 
in  about  400  years,  strong  evidences 
for  episcopacy,  with  now  and  then  a 
little  in  favor  of  the  papists.  And  in 
modern  times,  we  do  not  see  any 
thing  exactly,  in  all  respects,  like  the 
primitive  church.  What  are  we  then 
to  do .'  The  primitive  church  itself 
presents  us  diffisrent  aspects,  and 
really  we  are  unable  to  decide.  Tak- 
ing the  first  three  centuries  for  our 
standard,  we  should,  on  the  whole,  be 
presbyterians.  But,  taking  the  next 
century  and  a  half,  we  should  in  all 
probability  be  episcopalians.  We 
must  go  to  scripture,  and  find  the 
7iotes  of  a  true  church  there.  And 
then,  according  to  the  rule,  we  must 
look  to  the  church  to  expound  the 
scripture.  Drive  this  argument  as 
we  may,  it  will  run  round  in  a  cir- 
cle." 

2)  Sec  Essays  on  Romanism,  by 
an  Episcopalian,  very  highly  spoken 
of  and  quoted  in  London  Christian 
Observer,  1840,  p.  48. 


LECT.  IV,]  THE    FATHERS    MISREPRESENTED.  81 

But  there  are  other  grounds  on  which  we  would  protest 
against  that  most  unfair  use  which  is  made  by  Romanists  and 
prelatists,  of  these  ancient  records.  They  are  perverted  to 
their  own  purposes.^  They  are  subjected  to  just  the  same 
treatment  which  the  scriptures  are  wont  to  receive  at  their 
hands.  For  as  these  oracles  of  God  are  made  to  receive 
their  meaning  and  interpretation,  from  the  rites,  forms,  usages, 
and  opinions  of  the  Nicene  and  later  ages,  so  that  the  canonical 
meaning  of  scripture  can  only  be  ascertained  through  the  com- 
ments and  explanations  of  the  church  ;  just  in  the  same  man- 
ner these  ancient  records  of  the  Nicene  and  proximate  ages  are 
to  be  understood,  and  their  terms  explained,  by  the  meaning 
attached  to  these  terms,  and  by  the  principles  adopted,  in  the 
church  now.  It  is  utterly  forgotten,  that  "names,  rites,  and 
formularies  may  remain  unchanged,  when  their  spirit  and 
meaning  have  been  essentially  altered  ;  and  that  much  of  what 
the  Romanists  (or  prelatists)  confidently  appeal  to  in  the  early 
ages  of  Christianity,  carried  quite  a  different  import  to  a  cotem- 
porary  from  that  which  it  suggests  under  the  dominancy  and  in 
the    nomenclature    of   the   hierarchy."^ 

And,  finally  on  this  part  of  our  subject,  we  remark,  that  it 
would  be  easy,  with  no  other  assistance  than  what  is  rendered 
by  these  writers  themselves,  to  array  the  fathers  in  manifest 
support  of  this  sole  supremacy  of  scripture. 

"The  holy  and  divinely  inspired  scriptures,  are  sufficient  of 
themselves  to  the  discovery  of  truth,"  says  Athanasius. 

"It  is  an  instinct  of  the  devil  to  think  any  thing  divine  with- 
out the  authority  of  the  scriptures,"  says  Theophilus  of  Alex- 
andria. 

"  That  which  the  holy  scripture  hath  not  said,  —  by  what 
means  should  we  receive  and  account  it  among  these  things  that 
be  true  ?"  says  Cyril  of  Alexandria. 

Basil  declares,   "  It  is  a  manifest  falling  from  the  faith,  and 

1)  To  use  the  words  of  a  mem-  great  numbers  of  forged  and  spurious 
ber  of  the  English  church :  (Dr.  authors,  whose  testimonies  are  still 
Payne  in  Notes  of  the  Ch.  pp  163  produced  by  these  writers,  for  those 
and  1G4  :)  "  Besides  the  correcting,  or  doctrines  and  opinions  which  are  des- 
rather  corrupting  of  so  many  fathers,  titute  of  true  antiquity,  a  collection  of 
which  were  genuine  monuments  of  which  is  given  us  by  our  King  James, 
antiquity,  the  counterfeiting  of  so  in  his  Bastardy  of  the  False  Fathers  ; 
many  false  ones,  and  obtruding  of  so  and  all  those  critics  who  have  written 
many  spurious  authors  upon  the  censures  upon  the  fathers'  works  can- 
world,  is  a  plain  evidence  of  the  want  not  but  own  it." 

of  true  antiquity."      "  Thus  the   de-  2)  We  quote  from    the    London 

cretal  epistles  were   counterfeited  to  Chr.  Ob.  1840,  p.  48,  an  evangelical 

prop  up  the  pope's  spiritual  power,  episcopal  periodical. 
and  Constantino's  donation  to  estab-  3)  See  also  Note  A. 

lish  his  temporal."     "  But  there  are 
11 


82  THE   FATHERS   MISREPRESENTED.  [LECT.  IV. 

an  argument  of  arrogancy,  either  to  reject  any  point  of  those 
things  that  are  written,  or  to  bring  in  any  of  those  things  that 
are  not  written." 

"Forasmuch,"  says  Gregory  Nyssene,  "as  this  is  upholden 
with  no  testimony  of  scripture,  we  will  reject  it  as  false." 

"  Nothing  at  all  ought  to  be  delivered  concerning  the  divine 
and  holy  mysteries  of  faith  without  the  holy  scriptures,"  sailh 
Cyril  of  Jerusalem. 

"If  it  be  not  written,"  saith  Tertullian,  "  let  them  fear  that 
woe  which  is  allotted  to  such  as  add  or  take  away." 

"  As  we  deny  not,"  says  Jerome,  "  these  things  that  are 
written,  so  we  refuse  those  things  that  are  not  written." 

"  Whatsoever  ye  hear,"  says  Augustine,  "  (from  the  holy 
scriptures,)  let  that  savour  well  unto  you  ;  whatsoever  is  with- 
out them  refuse." 

"  It  would  be  superfluous,"  says  Mr.  Palmer,  from  different 
portions  of  whose  learned  work  these  authorities  are  chiefly 
taken,  "  to  cite  additional  testimonies  to  the  same  truth,  from 
Clemens  Alexandrinus,  Hippolytus,  Cyprian,  Optatus,  Hilary, 
Vincentius  Lirinensis,  Anastasius,  Prosper,  Theodoret,  Antony, 
Benedict,  Theophylact,  which  have  been  collected  by  our 
writers."' 

On  the  authority  therefore  of  the  fathers  —  that  is,  by  all  the 
weight  and  influence  attached  to  tradition  by  prelaiists  them- 
selves ;  we  are  required  to  receive  or  to  reject  this  doctrine,  as 
it  shall,  or  shall  not  make  good  its  title,  from  the  clear  and  cer- 
tain testimony  of  God's  Holy  Word.  The  apostolic  writings  are 
certainly  not  more  obscure  on  this  point  than  those  of  the  early 
fathers ;  for  the  meaning  of  the  one,  is  as  much  controverted, 
and  their  as  authority  variously  claimed,  as  is  the  case  with  the 
Bible.  And  the  whole  obscurity  on  this  subject,  which  is 
charged  upon  scripture,  arises  from  the  fact  that  the  assumed 
practice  of  the  early  church,  as  prelatical  and  not  presbyterian, 
is  made  to  justify  the  most  forced  construction  of  certain  pas- 
sages of  God's  Holy  Word.  But  let  that  word  speak  out  in  its 
plain  unvarnished  phrase,  and  this  obscurity  will  in  a  great  meas- 
ure vanish.^ 

VII.  A  seventh  ground  on  which  we  rest  this  claim  to  an 
unquestionable  scripture  authentication  of  these  exclusive  pow- 
ers, is  the  unreasonableness  of  the  whole  scheme,  in  itself  con- 
sidered. 

1)  Lee  on  the  Church,  vol.  ii.  p.  556,  560,  and  563.     Faber's  Albigen- 

13,  and  p.  74.  See  also  Newman  on  ses,  pp.  264,491,492;  see  also  Note  B. 
Romanism,  Lect.  xiii.  and  also  at  pp.  2)  See    Henderson's    Rev.    and 

274,  281.    Also  Oxf.  Tr.  vol.  i.  pp.  Consid.,  Edinb.  1706,  4to.  p.  53. 


LECT.    IV,]  THIS   DOCTRINE   UNREASONABLE.  83 

We  are  very  far  from  saying  of  any  doctrine,  that,  because 
mysterious,  and  removed  from  the  region  of  common  sense,  it  is 
therefore  of  necessity  false  —  as  a  scheme  pretending  to  divine 
authority.  But  what  we  do  affirm,  is,  that  being  not  only 
above,  and  beyond  reason,  and  therefore  beyond  man's  power  of 
origination  ;  but  being  also,  as  we  hold,  at  the  same  time, 
unreasonable  and  very  contrary  to  reason,  such  claims  cannot 
receive  the  shadow  of  respect,  as  of  divine  authority,  until 
their  divine  sanction  is  made  irresistibly  clear. 

Indeed  it  is  not  pretended,  that  these  prelatical  claims  are 
founded  in  reason,  or  are  to  be  adjudicated  upon  at  all  by  rea- 
son. Their  abettors  disclaim  utterly  any  such  foundation  or 
standard. 

Thus  let  us  hear  the  Rev.  William  Dodsworth,  in  his  recent 
Discourses  on  Romanism  and  Dissent:  "  If  human  reason,"  says 
he,  "  may  safely  reject  every  doctrine  which  is  above  its  powers, 
then  we  at  once  admit  that  this  doctrine  must  be  rejected ;  for 
the  conveyance  of  a  blessing  through  the  medium  of  some  men, 
which  is  not,  and  cannot  be  conveyed  through  others,  equal  or 
superior  to  them  in  all  respects  of  natural  endowment,  is  a 
mystery  of  which  human  reason  is  not  cognizant :  all  argument 
founded  upon  it,  therefore,  must  go  for  absolutely  nothing. 
Again,  we  admit  that  the  blessing  is  the  object  of  faith  and  not 
of  sight,  and  hence  the  true  foundation  of  our  belief  is  not 
touched  by  any  inference  which  is  drawn  from  visible  effects. 
Hence,  then,  the  Church  of  England  has  no  sympathy  with 
those  injudicious,  and  I  may  say  unbelieving  opponents  of  Ro- 
manism, who  throw  contempt  on  the  doctrine  of  apostolical 
succession,  deny  the  efficacy  of  the  sacraments  apostolically 
administered,  and  who  oppose  the  pretensions  of  the  Romish 
ministers  on  the  ground  that  no  visible  effects  follow  from  the 
exercise  of  those  sacred  functions,  in  behalf  of  which  they 
advance  such  preposterous  and  impious  claims.  Here,  again, 
we  shall  find  that  the  Church  of  England  is  equally  distant 
from  Romish  corruption  and  from  sectarian  latitudinarianism.^" 

So  again  in  his  discourse  on  the  efficacy  of  baptism,  he  says : 
"  Such  baptism  the  church  ever  regards  as  efficacious  to  the 
cleansing  away  of  sin,  to  justification,  to  the  implanting  of  a  new 
life,  to  the  illumination  of  the  spirit,  to  adoption  into  God's 
family,  to  heirship  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven.'" 

So  also  in  No.  80  of  the  Tracts  for  the  Times,  the  Oxford  trac- 
tators  thus  deliver  themselves  : 

1)  See  Oxf.  Tr.  vol.  i.  p.  26.  3)  See  Dodsworth  on  Romanism 

2)  See  Dodsworth  on  Romanism      and  Dissent,  p.  19. 
and  Dissent,  p.  6. 


84  THIS   DOCTRINE   UNREASONABLE.  [lECT.  IV. 

"  The  question  therefore  need  never  be,  whether  an  ordinance 
such  as  that  of  episcopacy,  can  be  proved  to  be  of  divine  command, 
for  it  has  been  observed,  that  our  Lord  never  said  that  he  was  the 
Christ.  But  he  was  not  on  that  account  the  less  so,  nor  was 
it  the  less  necessary  that  he  should  be  received  as  such.  All 
the  external  evidence  required  would  be,  whether  there  are  indica- 
tions of  a  divine  preference  given  to  it,  for  if  this  can  be  proved, 
it  is  sufficient  for  a  dutiful  spirit.  In  such  considerations,  all 
that  can  be  said  is,  "  he  that  can  receive  it,  let  him  receive  it," 
and  that  "the  poor  in  spirit"  occupy  "the  kingdom.'" 
Thus  also  Mr.  Keble  speaks, — 

"  The  succession  itself  is  —  a  mystery,  and  of  course  left  as  all 
mysteries  are,  in  some  respects  dimly  revealed,  i.  e.  in  the  world's 
language,  vague  and  indistinct."^ 

Now,  inasmuch  as  for  the  full  establishment  of  these  claims,  we 
are  to  be  deprived  of  all  use  of  our  own  understanding  in  the 
investigation  of  them  ;  and  of  all  exercise  of  the  right  of  private 
judgment  upon  the  reasonableness  of  them  ;  —  it  is  surely  incum- 
bent upon  their  abettors  to  put  their  divine  origin  beyond  any 
reasonable  doubt,  cavil  or  objection.  For,  to  use  the  language 
of  their  own  approved  commentator,  Bishop  Burnet  — 

"  We,  having  naturally  a  faculty  of  judging  for  ourselves,  and 
using  it  in  all  other  things,  this  freedom,  being  the  greatest  of  all 
our  other  rights,  must  be  still  asserted,  unless  it  can  be  made 
to  appear  that  God  has  in  some  things  put  a  bar  upon  it  by  his 
supreme  authority. 

"That  authority  must  be  very  express,  if  we  are  required  to 
submit  to  it  in  a  point  of  such  vast  importance  to  us.  We  do 
also  see  that  men  are  apt  to  be  mistaken,  and  are  apt  likewise 
willingly  to  mistake,  and  to  mislead  others  ;  and  that  particularly 
in  matters  of  religion  the  world  has  been  so  much  imposed  upon 
and  abused,  that  we  cannot  be  bound  to  submit  to  any  sort  of 
persons  implicitly,  without  very  good  and  clear  grounds  that  do 
assure  us  of  their  infallibility :  otherwise  we  have  just  reason  to 
suspect  that  in  matters  of  religion,  chiefly  in  points  in  which 
human  interests  are  concerned,  men  may  either  througii  ignorance 
and  weakness,  or  corruption,  and  on  design,  abuse  and  mislead 
us.  So  that  the  authorities  or  proofs  of  this  infallibility  must 
be  very  express ;  since  we  are  sure  no  man,  nor  body  of  men, 
can  have  it  among  them,  but  by  a  privilege  from  God ;  and  a 
privilege  of  so  extraordinary  a  nature  must  be  given,  if  at  all,  in 
very  plain  and  with  very  evident  characters ;  since  without  these 

1)  Tracts  for  the  Times,  No.  80,  2)  Keble  on  Tradition,  p.  9G. 

vol.  4,  p.  67. 


LECT.  IV.]  THIS   DOCTRINE    UNREASONABLE.  85 

human  nature  cannot,  and  ought  not  be  so  tame  as  to  receive  it. 
We  must  not  draw  it  from  an  inference  because  we  think  we 
need  it,  and  camot  be  safe  without  it,  that  therefore  it  must  be 
so,  because,  if  it  were  not  so,  great  disorders  would  arise  from 
the  want  of  it.'" 

"  It  is  also  certain,  that  if  God  has  lodged  such  an  infallibility 
on  earth,  it  ougiit  not  to  be  in  such  hands  as  do  naturally  heighten 
our  prejudices  against  it.  It  will  go  against  the  grain  to  believe 
it,  though  all  outward  appearances  looked  ever  so  fair  for  it ;  but 
it  will  be  an  inconceivable  method  of  Providence,  if  God  should 
lodge  so  wonderful  an  authority  in  hands  that  look  so  very  unlike 
it,  that  of  all  others  we  should  the  least  expect  to  find  it  whh 
them. 

"  If  they  have  been  guilty  of  notorious  impostures,  to  support 
their  own  authority,  if  they  have  committed  great  violences  to 
extend  it,  and  have  been  for  some  ages  together  engaged  in  as 
many  false,  unjust,  and  cruel  practices,  as  are  perhaps  to  be  met 
with  in  any  history;  these  are  such  prejudices,  that  at  least  they 
must  be  overcome  by  very  clear  and  unquestionable  proofs:  and 
finally,  if  God  has  settled  such  a  power  in  his  church,  we  must 
be  distinctly  directed  to  those  in  whose  hands  it  is  put,  so  that 
we  may  fall  into  no  mistake  in  so  important  a  matter."^ 

This  doctrine  of  the  supernatural  efiicacy  of  sacerdotal  minis- 
trations, and  the  exclusive  possession  of  this  sacred  gift  by  prela- 
tical  bishops,  is  either  reasonable,  or  it  is  above  reason,  or  it  is 
unreasonable.  If  it  is  reasonable,  then,  according  to  an  estab- 
lished maxim  of  modern  science,  we  must  neither  know,  believe, 
nor  assert  it,  without  having  warrantable  and  conclusive  evidence, 
wherewith  to  establish  and  make  it  good.  Positive  opinion  must 
rest  upon  indisputable  proof.  Where  such  a  measure  of  proof 
is  wanting,  that,  which  if  supported  by  it,  would  constitute  an 
opinion,  can  without  it,  be  regarded  as  no  more  than  a  doubt,  a 
conjecture,  or  a  question.  To  speak  confidently,  therefore,  in 
reference  to  this  matter,  which  is  at  least  only  set  forth  as  the 
more  probable  of  two  alternatives,  is  to  "  dogmatize  with  all  the 
pride  of  a  most  intolerable  assurance." 

1)  Burnet  on  the  39  Art.  p.  234.        ious  as  the  claim,  because  they  alone, 

2)  Ibid,  p.  235.  "With  such  had  the  custody  of  it."  Ibid, 
proofs,  (i.e.  more  than  ordinary  J  they  "  Much  less  could  they  adduce  the 
must  surely  be  prepared  ;  for  without  tradition  which  alone  could  establish 
them,  a  doctrine  so  questionable  must  the  claim, — the  written  apostolic,  uni- 
fall  by  its  own  improbability,"  so  says  versal  tradition,"  "which  is  not  the 
the  Hon.  and  Rev.  B.  W.  Noel,  in  Ro-  consent  of  two  fathers  or  of  ten,  but 
manistsand  Prot.  p.  .5.  of  the  universal  church  in  all  times 

"  They  bring  proof  from  unwritten      and  places."     Ibid, 
tradition.    But  the  proof  is  as  suspic- 


86  THIS    DOCTRINE    UNREASONABLE.  [lECT.  IV. 

Is  this  succession,  like  its  supposed  communications,  super- 
natural, and  thus  beyond  the  grasp  of  human  reason,  and  secret- 
ed from  human  observation  or  discovery,  both  as  to  its  means 
and  its  ends  ? —  then  do  we  demand  for  it  an  institution  as  clear 
and  undeniable  as  that  given  for  other  revealed  ordinances.  Or, 
on  the  other  hand,  is  this  doctrine  unreasonable,  so  as  to  be  not 
only  without  scripture  warrant,  but  also  to  be  contrary  to  reason  ? 
—  then  is  it  at  once,  and  without  ceremony,  to  be  cast  out  of  the 
church,  as  evil.  Now  that  this  doctrine  is  unreasonable,  would 
appear  from  this  consideration.  The  sacraments  are,  on  this 
theory,  the  appointed  means  of  grace.  The  sacraments  are 
efficacious  only  when  validly  administered.  They  are  only  thus 
administered  by  such  as  have  received  the  sacred  gift,  and 
the  mysterious  power  to  conduct  these  "  mysteries  "  by  the  im- 
position of  prelatical  hands.  But  it  cannot  be  denied,  that  be- 
yond the  line  of  this  demarcation,  the  heavenly  influences  of 
God's  saving  and  sanctifying  grace  do  nevertheless  descend  and 
manifest  themselves,  in  the  christianization  of  thousands  of  souls. 
Here,  then,  is  the  evidence  of  undeniable  and  undenied  facts, 
against  a  hypothetic  system.  There  are,  and  ever  have  been, 
beyond  the  pale  of  the  hierarchy,  thousands  who  have  given  all 
the  evidence,  which  the  cases  could  possibly  require,  that  they 
are  made  partakers  of  the  grace  of  God  which  worketh  salva- 
tion. It  is,  then,  most  unreasonable  to  say,  that  while  God 
thus  actually  bestows  his  grace  on  thousands  of  thousands  who 
do  not  receive  it  through  this  prelatic  channel.  He  nevertheless 
cannot  and  will  not,  and  is  under  promise  and  obligation  that  he 
will  not,  communicate  these  saving  influences,  except  through 
this  very  channel  of  the  "  episcopal  grace,''  and  by  the  hands  of 
prelatical  functionaries. 

Considered,  therefore,  as  being  unreasonable,  we  reject  this 
exorbitant  demand  upon  our  credulity.  Considered  as  above 
reason,  we  repudiate  it,  because  it  is  not  and  cannot  be  estab- 
lished by  scripture.  And  considered  as  reasonable,  we  deny  it, 
for  the  want  of  any  thing  like  sufficient  evidence. 

The  canon  of  modern  science,  which  makes  such  undoubted 
evidence  essential  to  the  establishment  of  any  opinion,  is  just 
as  true  of  the  word  of  God,  as  it  is  of  the  works  of  God  ;  and 
in  ascertaining  what  is,  or  is  not,  a  doctrine  of  God's  word  ;  as 
what  is,  or  is  not,  a  law  in  God's  works.  And  it  would  be  just 
as  reasonable  to  conclude,  that  the  early  philosophers,  with  the 
same  works  of  Nature  before  them,  could  more  accurately  dis- 
cover their  laws  and  operations,  than  those  of  modern  times  ; 
as  that  the  earlier  christians,  though  uninspired,  and  with  no 
other  Bible  before  them  than  what  we  possess,  could  discover 


LECT.    IV.]  PRELACY    KEJECTEl)    BY    SCRIPTURE.  87 

therein  a  system  of  such  matured  and  consohdated  polity,  based 
upon  principles  of  such  plain  and  avowed  prelacy  —  which  is 
altogether  undiscernable  to  the  closest  scrutiny  of  modern  inves- 
tigation. The  admitted  silence,  therefore,  of  the  Word  of  God, 
as  to  these  church  principles  ;  —  the  fact,  that  from  Matthew  to 
Revelation,  we  hear  not  a  word  about  apostolical  succession, 
and  sacerdotal  pre-eminence,  and  episcopal  grace,  and  supernat- 
ural communications,  by  the  laying  on  of  prelatical  hands ;  and 
of  the  sin  of  dissent  from  this  prescribed  episcopate,  as  heresy, 
and  schism,  and  destructive  of  salvation  ;  —  this  fact  alone,  is  to 
our  minds,  conclusive  evidence  against  them.  It  is  not  neces- 
sary, that  the  scriptures  should  be  explicit  in  denunciation  of 
them,  in  order  to  their  condemnation.  It  is  enough,  that  they 
are  not  to  be  found  in  scripture — that  they  are  not,  therefore, 
among  the  institutes  of  Christ,  as  recorded  in  this  book  of  the 
law.  This,  we  say,  is  enough  to  stamp  upon  them  the  mark  of 
reprobation.^  This  alone,  is  amply  sufficient  to  prove  that  they 
are  not  of  "  the  substance  of  that  faith  "  "  which  was  once  de- 
livered unto  the  saints  ; "  that,  however  ancient,  they  are  not 
apostolical,  — and  that  they  who  uphold  them,  "teach  for  doc- 
trines, the  commandments  of  men. '"^ 

Even  then,  were  this  system  not  in  direct  antagonism,  as  it 
is,  to  the  parabolical  institutions  and  to  the  prophetic  exhibi- 
tions of  our  Lord  ;^  —  were  it  not  equally  at  variance  with  the 
book  of  Acts,  the  j^rs^  and  only  inspired  record  of  the  primitive 
and  apostolic  church,  as  it  most  manifestly  is  ;*  —  even   did   it 

1)  See  this  shown  at  length,  in  See  also  Bishop  Williams  on  Notes 
Ancient  Christianity,  vol.  i.  of  the  Ch.  p.  Ill,  p.  117. 

2)  See  this  well  argued  in  Camp-  "  Knowing  of  themselves,  that  if 
bell's  Lect.  on  Eccl.  Hist.,  lect.  iv.  p.  appeal  be  made  to  the  sacred  bench  of 
58,  &c.  ed.  3d.  prophets   and    apostles,   they   cannot 

Hear  Bishop  Fowler  :  (Notes  of  the  stand,  they  carry  the  suit  of  religion 

Church,  p.  iii.)  "  We  could  very  wil-  craftily  into  the  court  of  the  fathers." 

lingly  appeal  to  our  adversaries  them-  (Bishop  Hall.) 

selves,  were  they  unconcerned,  wheth-  Thus  also  Jeremy  Taylor  :  "  IVhat- 

er  a  plainer  proof  can  be  given  of  a  soever  was  the  regimen  of  the  church 

baffled  cause  in  a  controversy  relating  in  the   apostles'  times,   that  must  be 

to  any  point  of  revealed  religion,  than  perpetual,  (not  so  as  to  have  all  that 

for  the  asserters  of  it  to  decline  main-  which  was  personal,  and  temporary, 

taining  it  by  those  books,  which  alone  but  so  as  to  have  no  other,)  for  that, 

can  acquaint  us  with  divine  revela-  and  that  only  is  of  divine  institution, 

tions.     But  it  is  notorious,  that  the  which  Christ  committed  to  the  apos- 

Romanists  are  highly  chargeable  upon  ties,  and  if  the  church  be  not  now 

this   account,  in   their  endeavors   to  governed  as  then,  we  can  show  no 

persuade  the  world  that  theirs  is  the  divine  authority  for  our  government, 

only  true  church."  which  we  must  contend  to  do,  and  do 

As  another  illustration  of  the  fact,  it  too,  or  be  called  usurpers."  Epis. 

that  in  argument  with  the  Romanists,  Asserted,  Wks.  vol.  vii. 

the  siZence  of  scripture  has  been  plead-  3)  Il)id,  vol.  i. 

ed  as   a  full,  sufficient   confutation,  4)  See  this  shown   at  length  in 

see  Dr.  Clagett  in  Notes  of  the  Ch.  Ancient  Christianity,  vol.  i. 
Ex.  p.  171,  and  172,  173,  174. 


S8  NO    PRELACY    IN    THE    BIBLE.  [LECT.    IV. 

not  come  under  the  anathema  thundered  against  that  predicted 
apostacy  from  the  purity  and  simplicity  of  the  gospel,  which  is 
foretold  in  the  apostolic  epistles  ;*  —  even  were  it  not  found  in 
inseparable  association  with,  or  eagerly  thirsting  after,  practices 
and  principles,  which  reduce  the  difference  between  the  prelacy 
and  the  papacy  to  a  distinction  in  particulars,  W'here  there  is  no 
difference  in  essentials;''  —  were  none  of  these  things  true,  yet 
still  this  very  silence  of  scripture,  and  the  undoubted  origination 
of  the  whole  nomenclature  by  which  it  is  described,  with  the  ec- 
clesiastics of  an  after-age,  seals  its  condemnation.  "  For,  surely," 
says  Mr.  Palmer,  '-'  it  is  in  the  highest  degree  improbable,  that 
doctrines  equally  necessary,  should  be  left  with  totally  unequal 
evidence  —  that  some  articles  should  be  delivered  by  scripture, 
as  well  as  tradition,  and  others  by  tradition  only.'"  Or,  to  use 
the  words  of  Mr.  Newman,  "  Surely,  w^e  have  more  reason  for 
thinking  that  these  doctrines  are  false,  than  that  their  saying  that 
they  are  apostolical,  is  true."* 

What  we  allege,  then,  is,  that  while  it  is  admitted,  even  by 
prelates  themselves,  that  in  scripture,  there  is  abundant  testi- 
mony to  the  divine  appointment  of  the  ministerial  order  of  pres- 
byters—  there  is  not,  on  the  contrary,  in  the  whole  Word  of 
God,  a  single  text  which  can  be  made  to  prove,  with  any  fair- 
ness, the  existence,  in  the  apostolic  churches,  of  an  order  of 
ministers  who  were  not  pastors  of  churches,  but  pastors  of  pas- 
tors —  bishops  of  bishops  —  governors  both  of  bishops  and  their 
flocks,  —  and  sole  repositories  of  "that  divine  grace  or  commis- 
sion, which  may  reasonably  be  considered  a  sacrament  in  the 
church."*  There  is  not,  we  repeat,  a  single  passage  in  the 
Word  of  God  from  which  this  doctrine  can  be,  with  any  fairness, 
or  certainty,  deduced.®  This  system,  which,  from  the  fundamen- 
tal and  necessary  character  attached  to  it,  and  the  prominence 
with  w'hich  it  is  held  forth,  we  might  expect  to  find  glaring  upon 
us  from  every  page  of  the  sacred  volume,  is  not  sustained  by  a 
single  trace  —  not  even  the  most  attenuated  shadow — of  explicit 
and  divine  appointment.  As  well  might  we  seek  the  living 
among  the  dead,  as  to  seek  for  diocesan  prelacy  in  the  scrip- 
tures of  truth.'' 

1)  See  Ancient  Christianity,  vol.  may  read  all  that  the  evangelists  have 
i.  p.  3.  recorded  of  the  sayings  of  Jesus,  and 

2)  Ibid,  passim.  all  that  the  humble,  though  inspired 

3)  Palmer,  vol.  ii.  p.  8,  9,  and  86,  a]>ostles  did  and  wrote,  till  he  won- 
and  vol.  i.  p.  131,  171.  ders  from  what  part  of  the  christian 

4)  On  Romanism,  p.  324.  revelation,  these  bold  and  lofty  claims 

5)  Palmer,  vol.  ii.  p.  441.  can  possibly  be  drawn.     He  peruses 

6)  See  Presb.  Def.  p.  40,  41.  and  re-peruses  the  testimony,  but  in 

7)  A  man,  it  has  been  truly  said,  vain !  —  he  finds  no  authority  for  this 


LECT.    IV.]        PROOF   FROBI   THE    BIBLE    MUST   BE    GIVEN.  89 

That  we  may  urge  this  point  with  some  authority,  and  not  as 
of  ourselves  merely,  let  us  again  employ  the  words  of  Bp.  Burnet, 
as  contained  in  his  "  Exposition  of  the  Thirty-nine  Articles." 
"The  silence  of  scripture  on  this  point,"  we  use  his  reasoning 
against  the  claims  of  the  Roman  pontiff,  "  seems  to  be  a  full  proof 
that  no  such  thing  was  intended  by  God ;  otherwise,  we  have  all 
reason  to  believe  that  it  would  have  been  clearly  expressed." 
"Here  the  greatest  of  all  privileges  is  pretended  to  be  lodged 
in  a  succession  of  bishops  without  any  one  passage  of  scripture 
importing  it."  "We  cannot  suppose  that  God  has  granted  any 
privileges,  much  less  infallibility,  (these  claim  indefectibihty,) 
which  is  the  greatest  of  all,  to  a  body  of  men  of  whom  or  of 
whose  constitution  he  has  said  nothing  to  us."  "  To  enjoin  it 
as  necessary,"  therefore,  "  to  obtain  the  pardon  of  sin,  and  to 
make  it  an  indispensable  condition,  and  indeed  the  most  indis- 
pensable of  all,  —  is  beyond  the  power  of  the  church  ;  for  since 
Christ  is  the  mediator  of  this  new  covenant,  he  alone  must  fix 
the  necessary  conditions  of  it."' 

The  abettors  of  prelacy  aver,  that  while  these  doctrines  are 
more  fully  developed  in  antiquity,  yet  are  they  drawn  from  the 
wells  of  sacred  scripture,  and  derive  their  authority  from  thence. 
Let  them  then  be  proved  by  this  sure  word  of  prophecy,  and  all 
controversy  is  at  an  end.  If  found  in  God's  word,  we  ask  not, 
nor  do  we  stand  in  need  of  antiquity,  to  avouch  for  the  truth  of 
God.  And  if  not  warranted  by  this  standard,  then  must  we  re- 
ject them  as  of  divine  right,  or  essential  to  the  faith,  though  ten 
thousand  fathers,  with  ten  thousand  dubious  pretended  miracles, 
should  attest  their  divine  original  ;  —  unless,  indeed,  scripture 
predicts  the  coming  of  such  brighter  testimony  to  a  doctrine 
which  the  sacred  writers  had  overlooked,  or  of  purpose  had  left 
unrecorded. 

hierarchical  Christianity  —  this  official  never  lordly,  priestly,  exclusive,  de- 
and  ceremonial  sanctity  —  this  sacra-  manding  : — but  affectionate,  tender, 
mental  and  hereditary  grace — this  conciliatory,  beseeching,  indulgent  to 
divine  right  to  supreme  rule  in  the  prejudice  and  weakness  —  non-com- 
church —  this  essential  distinction  of  pliant  and  unyielding  only  in  regard 
order,  and  function,  and  power,  be-  to  sin  :  indeed,  opposed  throughout 
tween  bishops  and  presbyters  ;  who,  to  the  spirit  which  has  ever  been  gen- 
in  the  New  Testament,  are  one  and  erated  by  the  fond  dream  of  *  apos- 
the  same.  He  compares  scripture  tolic  succession,'  and  all  its  attendant 
with  scripture  ;  —  he  studies  the  spirit  visions  ;  whether  in  the  Romish  or 
of  the  gospel  —  he  finds  it  meek,  Protestant  church."  See  Schism, 
lowly,  gentle,  self-denying,  self-diffi-  1)  See  on  the  xxxix.  Art.  p.  258, 
dent  —  not  wont  to  take  its  stand  on  259,  and  see  also  on  Art.  xx.  p. 2C)0,  and 
mere  authority  even  in  an  apostle  —  again  on  Art.  xxi,  p.  275,  and  on  Art. 
never  solicitous  for  outward  uniform-  xxii,  p.  290,  and  on  Art.  xxv.  p.  349, 
ity — ever  rising  superior  to  externals,  453,  355,  and  365.  Page's  ed. 
and  cleaving  to  spiritual  realities  — 

12 


90  PRELACY   A   GREAT    SECRET.  [lECT.  IV. 

Having  thus,  we  trust,  satisfactorily  proved,  that  the  silence  of 
scripture  is  conclusive  evidence  against  any  doctrines  claiming 
to  be  fundamental  or  essential  to  the  faith; — in  order  to  demon- 
strate the  falsity  of  these  prelalical  claims  —  it  will  be  only  nec- 
essary, further,  to  prove  that  their  establishment  is  not  sought 
for  in  scripture  alone.  Now  that  this  is  the  truth  in  the  case 
has  been  already,  in  part,  shown.  But  it  may  be  well  to  adduce 
still  further,  and  most  satisfiictory  testimony. 

Mr.  Palmer  allows  that  "  we  do  not  find  the  origin  of  epis- 
copacy exactly  recorded.''^ 

In  tract  No.  86,  the  Oxford  tractators  say  of  these  doctrines, 
"  they  appear  to  be  great  secrets,  notwithstanding  whatever  may 
be  said  of  them,  only  revealed  to  the  faithful."^  "If  the  epis- 
copal and  priestly  succession  have  in  them  something  divine, 
as  channels  which  convey,  as  it  were,  such  his  presence,  to  us  — 
we  must  expect  to  find  in  them  something  that  hideth  itself  — 
surrounded  with  difficulties  to  the  carnal  mind,  withdrawing  it- 
self," &c.^  "  These  would  lead  us  to  expect  that  they  should 
be  left  in  so  delicate  a  manner,  that  he  who  will  not  afford  them 
such  affectionate  attention,  will  lose  all  those  high  privileges."^ 
"  The  question,  therefore,  never  need  be  whether  an  ordinance, 
such  as  that  of  episcopacy,  can  be  proved  to  he  of  divine  com- 
mand."^ 

The  Oxford  writers,  in  Tract  No.  8,  further  acknowledge, 

1)  Palmer,  vol.  ii,  p.  282.  He,  Mr.  feet  right  to  make  any  regulation  in 
Palmer,  says  "  there  are  manifest  tra-  discipline  not  contrary  to  the  word  of 
ces  of  this  institution  in  scripture,"  God."  (ibid,  p.  391  )  "  Besides  this, 
(vol.  li.  p.  369.)  He  says,  "Titus  the  universal  church  having  approved 
viay  have  made  a  distinction  among  and  continued  this  discipline  from 
the  presbyters  in  Crete,  or  was  the  fourth  century,  at  latest,  till 
probably  himself  the  chief  pastor  of  the  reformation,  it  cannot  be  sinful  or 
those  churches."  (Ibid,  pp.  392  and  contrary  to  the  word  of  God."  (Ibid, 
393.)  "  The  consecration  of  bishops  p.  391.)  When  dioceses  arose,  which 
was  derived  from  divine  and  apostoli-  are  essential  to  modern  diocesan  epis- 
cal  tradition,  (in  opposition  to  the  dec-  copacy,  is,  he  grants,  uncertain.  (Ibid, 
laration  of  Hilary  tliat  bishops  and  p.  401.)  And  yet  "  general  supervision 
presbyters  were  the  same)  is  infinitely  in  a  diocese,"  is  one  of  the  rights  be- 
OToreTiT-oiaWc."  (Ibid,p.  395.)  "  Itisad-  longing  only  to  the  highest  of  the 
mitted,"  says  this  learned  author,"that  three  orders,"  according  to  Bishop 
bishops  and  presbyters  were  the  same  Onderdonk.  (See  Episcop.  Tested  by 
at  first,  and  that  the  church  was  gov-  Script,  p.  419.)  The  authority  for  their 
ERNED  by  a  council  of  presbyters  under  existence,  however,  as  late  as  the  third 
the  apostles,"  (ibid,  p.  394,)  "  and  the  century,  is"  rather  doubtful."  (Palm- 
full  amount  of  their  jurisdiction  (as  er,  p.  401.)  Presbyters  "were  grad- 
in  Jerome's  time,)  was  not  essential  ually  divested  of  the  cure  of  souls," 
to  the  episcopal  order,"  (ibid,  p.  394,)  and"  these  alterations  were  introduced 
for  says  he,  "  if  bishops  were  gradu-  gradually,"  »&c.  (Ibid,  p.  402.) 
ally  intrusted  with  more  exclusive  2)  In  vol.  4,  p.  49. 
power  by  the  church  than  they  pos-  3)  Ibid,  p.  65. 
sessed  at  first,  this  was  by  the  act  of  4)  Ibid,  p.  C5. 
the  church  herself,  which  had  a  per-  5)  Ibid,  p.  67. 


LECT.  IV.]  PRELACY   AVOWEDLY   NOT   IN    SCRIPTURE.  91 

"there  is  no  part  of  the  ecclesiastical  system  which  is  not/a/«^- 
ly  traced  in  scripture,  and  no  part  which  is  much  more  than 
faintly  traced.'^ 

In  tract  No.  85,  "  it  is  granted  by  the  writer  that  the  divine 
right  of  episcopacy,  the  apostolical  succession,  the  power  of  the 
church,  he,  are  wanting  in  direct  or  satisfactory  proof,  and  are 
to  be  established,  if  at  all,  only  by  the  aid  of  very  attenuated, 
and  nicely  managed  inferential  arguments."  "  Every  one 
MUST  allow,"  says  the  writer,  "  that  there  is  next  to  nothing 

on  the  SURFACE,  of  SCRIPTURE  ABOUT  THEM,  and  VERY  LITTLE 
EVEN    UNDER    the    SURFACE,    of  a   SATISFACTORY     CHARACTER  ; 

a  few  striking  texts  at  most,  scattered  up  and  down  the  inspired 
volume,  or  one  or  two  particular  passages  of  one  particular  epis- 
tle, or  a  number  of  texts  which  may  mean,  but  need  not  mean, 
what  they  are  said  by  churchmen  to  mean,  which  say  something 
looking  like  what  is  needed,  but  with  very  little  point  and 
strength,  inadequately  and  unsatisfactorily."^ 

"  Some  doctrines,  such,  for  instance,  as  the  spiritual  gifts  in 
ordination,  which  are  assumed  to  be  great  and  real  where  these 
ordinances  are  duly  and  worthily  received,  "  the  church  has 
retained  by  oral  tradition,  and  maintained  by  her  uniform  spirit 
of  deference  to  the  early  church,  whose  hallowed  lamp  she  car- 
ries on,  and  whose  handmaid  she  is."^ 

Mr.  Newman  says  of  "  the  sects  around  the  church,"  that 
"  they  gain  their  opinions  from  a  distinct  source,  their  private 
examination  of  the  scriptures,  by  which  they  conjecture  the 
doctrine  of  Christ,  with  its  traditionary  delivery  through  its 
appointed  stewards."^ 

The  famous  Henry  Dodwell  also  admits  the  same  thing.* 
"  They  (the  sacred  penmen)  no  where,  with  decided  clearness, 
distinguish  the  extraordinary  officers,  (i.  e.  the  apostles,) 
WHO  WERE  NOT  TO  OUTLIVE  THAT  AGE,  fi'om  the  Ordinary  min- 
isters who  were  not  to  cease  till  the  second  coming  of  Christ. 
They  no  where  explain  professedly  the  offices  or  ministries  them- 

1)  See  this  and  more,  quoted  in  successors  of  the  apostles  in  general. 
Ancient  Christianity,  vol.  i.  p.  241.  On  these  subjects,  the  scripture  is  si- 

2)  Tract  81,  p.  1,  vol.  4.  lent.     Not  one  of  the  sacred  writers 

3)  And  that  we  do  not  misjudge  has  thought  of  describing  in  detail  the 
these  writers  will  appear  from  the  plan  of  church  government,  which  the 
following  testimony  from  the  Dublin  apostles  established  to  be  observed  af- 
Review  of  May,  1840,  pages  345,  346,  ter  their  death.  For  that  we  must 
a  Roman  catholic  publication.  (See  have  recourse,  as  the  Oxford  teachers 
the    Method.   Quart.   Rev.    for    Jan.  admit,  to  tradition." 

1841.)     "  Avowedly  there  is  no  direct  3)  On  Romanism,  p.  322. 

mention  of  the  bishop  of  Rome  in  the  4)  De    Nupero    Schismate,   sect, 

scripture,  no  specification  of  the  spirit-  14,  in  Powell   on   Ap.  Succ.  pp.  32 

nal  authority  given  to  St.  Peter;  no,  and  33. 
nor  even  of  the  authority  given  to  the 


92 


PRELACY   AVOWEDLY   NOT   IN    SCRIPTUHE.  [lECT.  IV. 


selves,  as  to  their  nature  and  extent ;  which  surely  they  would 
have  done,  if  any  particular  form  had  been  prescribed  for  per- 
petual duration." 

Admissions  equally  important  are  made  by  Bishop  Onder- 
donk,  and  that  too  even  in  his  Tract  on  Episcopacy  tested  by 
Scripture.  There  he  teaches  that  "  all  that  we  read  in  the 
New  Testament  concerning  bishops,  (including,  of  course,  the 
words  overseers  and  oversight,)  is  to  be  regarded  as  pertaining 
to  that  middle  grade  of  presbyters. "i  *'  It  was  after  the  apos- 
tolic age,  that  the  name  bishop  was  taken  from  the  second 
order,  and  appropriated  to  the  first  —  as  we  learn  from  The- 
odoret"^ — a  WRITER  of  the  fifth  century!  —  and  this  is 
the  scripture  by  which  episcopacy  is  tested  !^ 

It  is  thus  manifest,  by  the  showing  of  prelatists  themselves, 
that  prelacy  cannot  —  to  say  the  very  least  —  be  so  certainly 
revealed  in  the  word  of  God,  as  to  be  a  necessary  doctrine  — 
for  such  doctrines,  says  Palmer,''  "  are  known  to  be  so  by  the 
clear  words  of  scripture."     These  only  are  matters  of  faith. 


1)  See  p.  420. 

2)  Ibid,  p.  480. 

3)  fie  further  says,  "  the  original 
meaning  of  bishop  was  only  a  presby- 
ter." "  Was  the  laying  on  of  hands 
on  Timothy  an  ordination  ?  It  can- 
not at  least  be  proved  ;  and  comparing 
scripture  with  scripture,  are  we  not 
justified  in  regarding  it,"  &c.  "  The 
ordination  of  Timothy  may  be  alluded 
to  by  St.  Paul  in  tlie  second  epistle,  the 
gift  of  God,"  &c.  "  If  not  then,  or 
in  this  view,  both  these  passages  are 
unconnected  with  the  controversy  be- 
fore us."  (Ibid,  p.  427.)  He  then  gives 
several  meanings  attachable  to  this 
decisive  passage  in  1  Tim.  iv.  18,  (ibid, 
pp.  427,  428,)  the  amount  of  which  is 
to  show  that  the  application  of  the 
passacre  is  very  doubtful.  "  Tlie  mere 
expression,  presbytery,  therefore,  (p. 
421),)  does  not  ej:plain  itself  a.nd  cannot 
of  itself  be  adduced  in  favor  of  pari- 
ty," nor  of  imparity.  (Ibid,  p.  429,  at 
bottom.)  It  "  cannot  explain  itself  in 
favor  of  our  opponents.  It  can  only  be 
referred  to  a  body  of  clergymen  ;  and 
these  clergymen  may  have  been  in  part 
or  entirely  apostles,  who  were  supe- 
rior to  presbyters."  (p.  430.)  "  It  is 
evident,  therefore,  if  this  passage 
refer  to  an  ordination."  (Ibid.)  "  On 
the  whole,  can  it  be  denied,  that  a 
cautious  and  candid  interpretation  of 
the  two  passages  said  to  relate  to  the 
ordination  of  Timothy,"  &c.  (Ibid.) 
"  And  considering  the  above  distinc- 


tion of  by  and  with,  (see  p.  430)  our 
theory  is  obviously  the  better  of  the 
two."     (431.) 

Now  as  the  author  (p.  436)  makes 
positive  proof  necessary  tor  the  presby- 
terian  claim,  a  fortiori  do  we  demand 
it  for  prelacy,  and  "  a  hint,"  there- 
fore, is  not  to  be  made  "  imperative." 
The  demonstrative  plainness  with 
which  this  author  claims  to  have  dis- 
covered his  "  theory  "  in  the  New 
Testament,  reminds  us  of  the  Irish- 
man's telescope,  with  which  he  could 
see  far  out  of  sight. 

Bishop  Onderdonk  seems  to  have 
himself  discovered,  that  it  would 
hardly  do  to  venture  the  claims  of 
prelacy  on  scripture  alone,  since  in 
his  answer  to  Mr.  Barnes,  he  says, 
(p.  92,)  "  And  the  '  press,'  at  the 
time  it  issued  the  tract,  issued  also 
with  it,  in  the  '  Works  on  Episco- 
pacy,' those  of  Dr.  Bowden  and  Dr. 
Cooke,  which  embrace  the  argument 
at  large.  Tliere  is  no  reason,  there- 
fore, for  thinking  that,  however  a 
single  writer  may  use  selected  argu- 
ments in  a  single  publication,  eitJier 
he  or  otlier  episcopalians  will  (or 
should)  narrow  the  ground  they  have 
usually  occupied.  The  fathers  are 
consulted  on  this  subject,  because  the 
fabric  of  tiie  ministry,  which  they 
describe,  forms  an  historical   basis  for 

INTERPRETING    SCRIPTURE  !  " 

4)  vol.  ii.  p.  104. 


LECT.  IV.]  PRELACY    OVERTHROWN   BY   SCRIPTURE.  93 

"  Other  doctrines,  which  are  deduced  from  passages  of  scripture, 
ivhich  admit  of  a  different  interpretation,  are  matters  of  opin- 
ion, and  they  may  be  received  or  not  received,  without  heresy, 
because  there  is  no  certainty  il'x^i  they  were  revealed  by  Christ." 
"  In  this,  and  in  all  similar  cases,  those  who  are  in  error  are  free 
from  heresy,  when  they  judge  (on  prohahle  grounds)  their  opin- 
ion supported  by  a  greater  scriptural  and  ecclesiastical  author- 
ity, than  that  of  their  opponents.'"  "  These,  however  misled, 
are  not  schismatics  in  the  sight  of  God,  and  are,  therefore,  in  a 
state  of  salvation."^ 

From  all  that  has  been  said,  we  conclude  that  prelacy,  when 
tested  by  scripture,  cannot  —  our  enemies  themselves  being 
judges  —  be  so  established,  and  as  of  such  necessary  importance, 
as  to  endanger  either  the  church  standing,  or  the  personal  sal- 
vation of  those  who  reject  it  as  unscriptural  and  unreasonable. 
And  this  conclusion,  though  plentifully  obviated  by  other  state- 
ments, is  admitted  by  Bishop  Onderdonk  himself.  "  An  appar- 
ently formidable  yet  extraneous  difficulty,  often  raised,  is,"  says 
he,  this,  "  that  episcopal  claims  unchurch  all  non-episcopal 
denominations.  By  the  present  writer  this  consequence  is  not 
allowed."' 

When  we  come  to  the  proof  of  our  position,  that  presbyters 
are  the  true  successors  of  the  apostles,  it  will  be  time  enough  to 
authenticate  our  right  positively  ;  and  to  show,  not  only  that 
presbyterianism  "  has  divine  sanctions,  and  must  stand  with  epis- 
copacy,'"'' but  that  it  is  the  truly  apostolic  and  christian  polity, 
and  that  prelacy  must  stand,  —  as  we  freely  grant  it  may,  —  as 
one,  though  but  one,  and  that  an  altered  and  deteriorated,  form 
of  presbyterian  episcopacy, —  the  truly  primitive  and  apostolical 
polity.' 

1)  See  Palmer  vol.  ii.  p.  108.  the  epistles,  but  they  afterwards  re- 

2)  Ibid,  p.  109.  ceived  it,  and  ordained  ceremonies." 
fi)  Wks.  on  E|)isc.,  p.  414  ;  see,  '  His  opponent  urging,  (ibid,  p.  04,) 

however,  the  stnrtling   peroration    of  that  the  church  could  have  no  author- 

his  Tract,  on  p.  437,  and  liis   remarks  ity  to  act  in  opposition  to  the  express 

in  his  charge,  (pp.  9,  15,  16,)  for  1831.  directions  of  scripture,  which  enjoined 

4)  See  Ibid,  p.  1.  an  exact  conformity  to  the  divine  laws 

5)  The  gray  friar  who  undertook  respecting  worship:  "If  so,"  said 
to  argue  with  Knox  at  the  convention  Azbugkill,  "you  will  leave  us  no 
of  learned  men,  held  at  the  univer-  church."  "  Yes,"  rejoined  Knoi, 
sity  of  St.  Andrews,  (McCrie's  life  of  sarcastically,  "  in  David  1  read  of  the 
Knox,  vol.  1,  p.  C3,)  "  raslily  en-  church  of  malignants,  Odi  ccdesiavi 
gaged  to  prove  the  divine  institution  mallgnantium;  this  church  you  may 
of  ceremonies;  and,  being  pushed  by  have  without  the  word,  and  fighting 
his  antagonist  from  the  gospel  and  against  it.  Of  this  church  if  you  will 
acts  to  the  epistles,  and  from  one  epis-  be,  I  cannot  hinder  you  ;  but  as  for 
tie  to  another,  he  was  driven  at  last  to  me,  I  will  be  of  no  other  church  but 
affirm,  that  the  apostles  had  notreceiv-  that  which  has  Jesus  Christ  for  pastor, 
ed  the  Holy  Ghost  when  they  wrote  hears  his  voice,  and  will  not  hear  the 

voice  of  a  stranger." 


94  PRELACY   AND   PRESBYTERY   CONTRASTED.  [LECT.    IV. 

But  before  concluding,  we  are  led  to  observe  two  striking 
characteristics  of  our  church  in  contrast  with  that  of  the  prelacy. 
"  The  great  characteristic  "  of  that  church,  to  use  the  lan- 
guage of  one  of  the  most  recent  tracts  of  the  Episcopal  Tract 
Society,  "is  a  reverence  for  antiquity."'  "We  are  to  look," 
says  Mr.  Keble,  "  before  all  things,  to  the  integrity  of  the  good 
deposite,"  "the  treasure  of  apostolical  doctrines  and  church 
rules,"  ascertained  by  "apostolical  tradition ;"  "a  tradition  so  high- 
ly honored  by  the  Almighty  founder  and  guide  of  the  church,  as  to 
be  made  the  standard  and  rule  of  his  own  divine  scriptures,"  so 
that  "  the  scriptures  themselves  do  homage  to  the  tradition  of 
the  apostles."  "  Our  clergy,"  he  says  again,  "can  be  called 
upon  to  walk  by  the  rule  of  primitive  antiquity,  rather  than  by 
their  more  private  judgment."  It  is  therefore  truly  affirmed  in 
the  tract,  already  quoted,  and  which  has  been  largely  circulated 
by  episcopalians  in  this  country,  that,  "  if  no  western  church 
now-a-days  is  quite  what  its  mother  (the  church  of  Rome)  used 
to  be,  (alluding  to  what  had  been  lost  by  the  evil  change  of  the 
reformation,)  the  catholic  church  in  England,  Scotland  and  Amer- 
ica, —  that  is,  the  protestant  episcopal  churches  of  those  coun- 
tries—  surely  comes  nearest  to  her;  nay,  so  near,  that  they, 
who  have  well  scanned  the  mother's  lineaments,  can  be  at  no 
loss  to  trace  her  features  in  her  child. "^  Such,  then,  is  the  self- 
drawn  portraiture  of  the  prelacy. 

What  a  contrast  is  presented,  when  we  turn  our  gaze  upon 
the  presbyterian  branch  of  the  true,  catholic,  and  apostolic 
church.  Stripped  of  all  the  vestments  of  ancestral  pride  j  dis- 
daining to  conceal,  under  the  trappings  of  official  dignity,  her 
poverty  and  emptiness  ;  assuming  no  forms  of  earthly  splendor ; 
and  hiding  not  herself  amid  the  dim,  discolored  light  of  darken- 
ing ages  ;  she  stands  forth  upon  the  pedestal  of  truth,  in  all  the 
simplicity  of  her  unadorned  beauty,  clothed  only  in  those  garments 
of  righteousness  which  were  aforetime  prepared  for  her,  by  the 
ministry  of  her  divine  Master,  and  his  inspired  apostles.  Nei- 
ther fearing,  nor  courting  observation,  she  is  satisfied  with  the 
inward  assurance,  that  with  her,  resides  the  treasure  of  sacred 
doctrine,  the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus ;  that  in  her  society  there 
will  be  heard  no  other  converse  than  that  of  Christ  and  his 
apostles;  —  that  from  her  voice,  there  will  go  forth  no  other 
doctrines,  than  such  as  are  of  God;  —  and  that  all,  therefore, 
who  put  themselves  under  her  guidance,  shall  find  her  ways 
pleasantness,  and  all  her  paths,  peace. 

1)  No.    153.  Ancient  Things  of  2)  Primitive  Tradition,  pp.  44, 28. 

the  Catholic  Church,  p,  7.  3)  Tract,  153,  p.  6. 


LECT.  IV.]    PRELACY  AND  PRESBYTERY  CONTRASTED.  95 

The  great  characteristic  of  our  church  is,  therefore,  her  fear- 
lessness of  scripture.  No  merely  human  system  dare  trust  itself 
to  scripture,  and  to  nothing  but  scripture.  It  is,  it  must  be,  afraid 
of  it.  Its  coward  heart  trembles  at  the  approach  to  such  a  fiery 
ordeal;  and  is  already  filled  with  a  certain  fearful  looking-for  of 
judgment  and  of  condemnation.  Therefore,  does  the  papacy  throw 
discredit,  doubt,  and  foul  reproach,  upon  the  sacred  scriptures, 
as  a  sure  and  infallible  rule  of  faith ;  and  upon  the  sacred  right 
and  duty  of  private  judgment,  as  necessary  in  their  investigation : 
and  therefore  does  her  child,  the  prelacy,  imitate  her  kind  mother, 
whose  lineaments  she  so  plainly  bears,  to  mark  her  as  her  own. 
While  she  grudgingly  holds  forth  the  sacred  volume  with  one 
arm;  she  stretches  forth  the  interposing  authority  of  the  church, 
as  its  only  authorized  interpreter,  in  the  other ;  and  thus  silences 
the  inquiring  mind,  with  the  enforced  necessity  of  cautious  re- 
serve, and  reverential  self-denial,  in  taking  up  opinions  of  its  own. 
It  is,  therefore,  to  the  holy  and  beautiful  liturgy  ;  —  to  the  incom- 
parable articles  ; —  and  to  all  other,  her  appointed  means  for 
communicating  divine  knowledge  to  the  soul — she  points  the 
weary  and  heavy-laden  traveller  to  Zion.^ 

Not  such,  however,  is  the  character  of  that  church  — composed 
of  spiritual  freemen  —  and  to  which  we,  by  the  great  grace  of 
God,  are  honored  in  belonging.     She  speaks  "  as  unto  wise 

1)  "  And  yet,"  says  the  Rev.  John  poor  and  perishing  sinner. — "  The  sa- 

A.  Clark  (Letters  on  the  Church,  Phil.  craments,  again,  are  a  still  higher  way 

1839,  p.  35,)  it  is  undoubtedly  true  that  in  which  the  church  helps  us  against 

in   the    face  of  all   this,  and   in   the  time — by    bringing    heaven    forward 

face    of  the    most    positive    declara-  upon  earth,  by  fetching  eternity  out 

tions  of  God's   words  to  the  contrary,  into  time,  by  bringing  great  gifts  from 

there  are  some  within  our  borders  who  far,  and  by  them,  in  the  midst  of  time, 

point  out  no  other  method  of  salvation  substantially    anticipating    eternity." 

to  dying  sinners  than  the  practice  of  a  Tr.  160  of  Prot.  Episc.  Tr.  Soc.  p.  10. 

certain  round  of  moral  duties."  "  The  sacraments  by  which  it  (the 

..„,.,.,,       ,   ,  ■  ,.  1-  •      r  incarnation)    is   conveyed    to  us   and 

"  Ihat  hi"h-cnurcli  nave  a  right  divine  irom  .  >>      rn      -iro     r  i<       t>     , 

jgve  =  "  GIVEN  to  US.        Ir.  158  of  the   Prot. 

By  signs  and  wonders  they  pretend  to  prove.  Episcop.   Tr.  Soc.  p.  9.      If  this  is  not 

They  (i.e.  Dodwellj  can  a  mortal  soul  immor-       pure  nonsense,  it  is  rank  popery,  and  to 

talmake;  ,    ,    „      our  minds  impiously  profane.    Again, 

They  can  by  prayers  our  constitution  shake."       .       .,  .  ,  ■,  i     ,.  t/       i  .      ^       ' 

in  ibid.   p.   14,  "  You  have  the  pres- 

See  High-church  Miracles,  printed  ence  of  God  within  you.  Sacraments, 
in  1710,  in  Scott's  Coll.  of  Tracts,  vol.  providences,  ordinances,  discipline, 
12,  p.  320.  ascetic  habits,  sometimes  slowly,  some- 
Strange  it  is,  that  while  these  men  times  swiftly,  all  have  been  drawing 
make  the  sacraments  the  great  end  your  natural  infirmities  more  and  more 
and  glory  ofthe  church,  there  is  not  one  within  the  power  of  this  supernatural 
word  about  sacraments,  as  Mr.  Leslie  kingdom."  And  on  p.  15,  "  self-strug- 
admits,in  the  apostles' creed.  See  Short  ling  is  against  the  Spirit  and  the  sacra- 
Method  with  Roman  Catholics  :  Edin.  inents.  Therefore  deny  that  self,  and 
1835,  p.  21.  And  yet  the  church  and  the  empire  of  Christ  will  stretch  forth 
the  sacraments  constitute  the  alpha  from  the  river  even  unto  the  green  sea, 
and  the  omega  of  high-church  divin-  from  baptism  until  eternity  begins." 
ity,  and  their  only  consolation  for  the  Truly  this  is  another  gospel  ! 


90  PRELACY    AND    PRESBYTERY    CONTRASTED.  [lECT.  IV. 

men."  She  addresses  the  understanding  and  the  heart.  She 
commends  herself  and  her  doctrines  unto  men,  and  not  merely 
as  unto  babes  and  children  in  Christ.  She  speaks  forth  the 
truth,  and  the  whole  truth ;  and  giving  into  their  hands  the 
heavenly  oracles,  she  calls  upon  her  members  to  judge  her 
words,  and  to  search  the  scriptures,  whether  these  things  are 
so.  She  looks  scripture  in  the  face,  and  holds  with  it  direct, 
immediate,  and  constant  communion.  She  does  not  build  her 
faith  upon  shreds  and  patches;  upon  forced  constructions,  and 
hypercritical  analogies ;  or  upon  illogical  inferences ;  "  picking 
and  choosing"  what  suits  with  her  established  wishes.  She 
renounces,  and  calls  upon  all  her  followers  to  abandon,  this 
"  popery  of  the  heart,"  and  to  seek  the  solution  of  every  doubt, 
and  direction  in  every  perplexity,  in  that  sure  word  of  prophecy, 
to  which  she  gives  earnest  heed,  as  unto  a  light  shining  in  a 
dark  place. 

But  to  proceed :  Hadrian  Saravia,  in  his  Treatise  on  the  Priest- 
hood, published  in  the  year  1591,  says,  in  one  place,'  "There 
IS  NO  QUESTION  but  that  the  apostles  held  the  first  rank  ;  evan- 
gelists the  second  ;  prophets  the  third  ;  pastors  and  presbyters 
the  fourth;  teachers  the  last:"  thus  making  five  orders,  be- 
sides deacons.  These  are  "  the  different  degrees  of  authority, 
appointed  in  the  beginning  by  our  Lord,  and  continued  by  the 
apostles."  And  yet  does  this  writer  take  upon  him  to  reverse 
this  decision.  "  Although,"  says  he,  "  St.  Paul  mentions  proph- 
ets in  the  second  place,  I  remove  them  into  the  third  —  follow- 
ing, not  so  much  the  order  of  dignity,  as  the  time  of  institution 
of  the  offices  of  the  New  Testament :  "*  as  if  he  knew  the 
time  of  their  institution. 

What  can  exceed — 'in  such  bold  and  irreverent  assumption  of 
a  power  to  interpret  scripture,  to  the  liking  of  their  own  priestly 
notions  —  the  declaration  of  this  same  wTiter,  "  the  happy  au- 
thor of  many  learned  tracts"  "concerning  episcopacy;"  — 
"  that  since  the  apostolical  traditions  concerning  the  government 
of  the  church,  and  its  externals,  were  drawn  first  by  our 
Saviour  himself,  and  afterwards  by  his  apostles,  from  the  Old 
Testament ;  with  such  modifications  as  difference  of  time  and 
place  required  ;  no  fault  can  be  found  with  the  fathers,  if  they 
should  appear  to  have  taken  certain  regulations  from  the  same 
source  !  "^  What  is  this,  1  ask,  but  to  reduce  our  blessed  and 
divine  Saviour  to  a  level,  as  an  instituter  of  sacred  laws,  and 
as  an  interpreter  of  scripture,  with  the  apostles  and  the  fathers ; 

1)  Oxf.  ed.  1840,  p.  57.  3)  Saravia  on  Priesthood,  Pref. 

2)  Ibid,  p.  77. 


LECT.  IV.]  PRELACY   AND   PRESBYTERY    CONTRASTED,  97 

and  to  exalt  the  fathers  and  apostles,  to  the  same  pre-eminence 
in  authority  and  wisdom,  with  the  Son  of  God  liimself. 

Nor  is  there  less  presumptuous  arrogance  in  the  declaration 
of  this  same  "happy  author,"  —  made  after  he  had  himself  oth- 
erwise interpreted  and  applied  these  very  passages  —  that  the 
orders  of  patriarchs,  archbishops  and  metropolitans,  "  are  deno- 
ted by  the  titles  of  apostles  and  evangelists  ;  —  in  the  epistle  to 
the  Romans,  by  the  words,  '  he  that  ruleth,'  (Rom.  xii.  8,) 
and  in  the  epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  by  the  term,  '  govern- 
ments.'" (1  Cor.  xii.  28.)' 

We  are  thus  led  by  these  examples,  to  the  notice  of  another 
striking  feature  of  prelacy,  as  contrasted  with  presbyterianism, 
and  that  is,  the  spirit  of  lightness  and  irreverence  with  which  it 
treats  the  word  of  God,  and  makes  it  subservient  to  its  own 
purposes."  This  it  does  by  teaching,  first,  that  a  discretionary 
power  is  given  to  prelates,  to  decree  rights  and  ceremonies 
which  shall  be  enforced,  as  necessary  terms  of  communion  with 
the  church  of  Christ.  Secondly,  by  teaching  that  prelates  are 
the  authoritative  interpreters  of  scripture,  so  that  it  must  mean 
what  they  are  pleased  to  say  it  does  mean.  Thirdly,  by  teach- 
ing that  primitive  tradition  is  parallel  to  the  scriptures — and  of 
an  equally  divine  original  —  and  binding  necessity.^  And  we 
have  just  seen  how,  acting  upon  these  principles,  the  defenders 

1)  Ibid,  p.  240.  Dr.  Campbell,  of  Armagh,  in  his 

2)  "Therefore,"  says  the  Rev.  Vindication  of  the  Principles  and 
Mr.  Boyd,  in  favor  of  the  prelatic  Character  of  the  Presbyterians  of 
theory,  "  for  our  nonconformity  with  Ireland,  (London,  1787,  3d  ed.  p.  6,) 
the  conduct  of  our  Master,  (which  we  alludes  to  "  the  famous  debate  be- 
deny  was  intended  in  this  case  to  be  tween  Hoadley  and  Sherlock,  in 
a  binding  pattern,)  we  plead  His  which  we  find  Parker,  bishop  of  Ox- 
nonconformity  to  the  rule  and  ancient  ford,  asserting  the  king  was  superior 
usage   of  Israel."     That   is,  because  to  Christ." 

Christ  thought  proper  to  abrogate  a  Pope  Innocent,  of  course  guided  by 

Jewish  rite,  both  in  its  matter  and  his  infallibility,  clearly  discovered  the 

manner    of    observance,  —  therelbre,  divine  origin  of  his  office  in  the  first 

Episcopalians  are  at  liberty  to  tamper  chapter  of  Genesis.     "  For  the  firma- 

with  his   holy  institutions."     (Presb.  inent  of  heaven,  (i.  e.)  of  the  univer- 

Def.  p.  266.)  sal  church,  God  made  two  great  lights, 

3)  What  can  be  more  absolutely  (i.  e.)  he  ordained  two  dignities  or 
dsetructive  to  all  inherent,  original,  powers,  which  are  the  pontifical  au- 
and  independent  authority,  in  the  writ-  thority,  and  the  regal  power  ;  but  that 
ten  word  of  God,  than  the  authority  which  rules  the  day,  (i.  e.  spiritual 
claimed  by  prelatists  for  tradition  and  matters,)  is  the  greater,  but  that  which 
the  church.  Thus  Dr.  Bowden  de-  governs  carnal  things,  is  the  lesser." 
livers  their  views :  (Works  on  Epis-  Thus  also,  by  the  tops  of  the  moun- 
cop.  vol.  i.  p.  116:)  "As  episcopacy  tains,  in  tlie  seventy-second  Psalm, 
appears  from  a  cloud  of  witnesses  to  nothing  can  be  more  rightly  designed 
be  the  government  of  the  church,  at  than  the  prelates  and  priests  of  tJie 
the  close  of  the  apostolic  age,  it  can  church,  as  we  are  taught  by  Mr.  Scla- 
never  be  admitted,  that  any  thing  in  ter,  a  Romanist.  (See  in  Notes  of 
the  New  Testament  militates  against  he  Church,  p.  318.) 

this  fact." 

13 


98  PRELACY   AND    PRESBYTERY    CONTRASTED.         [LECT.  IV. 

of  prelacy  can  even  boast  that  there  is  little  or  nothing  about  it 
in  the  Bible,  nothing  certainly  of  a  clear  or  satisfactory  nature ; 
and  how  even  an  apostle  can  be  set  right,  when,  in  prelatic 
judgment,  he  mistakes  as  to  the  relative  dignity  or  order  of 
these  hierarchical  rulers. 

Not  such,  however,  is  the  spirit  of  presbyterianism.  It 
claims  indeed  the  right  of  private  judgment,  in  ascertaining  what 
is  the  true  word  of  God,  and  what  that  word  truly  says  —  but 
there  it  stops.  It  bows  reason,  private  judgment,  and  all  discre- 
tionary opinions,  whether  private  or  public,  individual  or  synod- 
ical,  to  the  supremacy  of  this  divine  and  infallible  standard. 
It  assumes  no  power  of  binding  any  conscience,  in  any  matter  in 
which  God  has  left  it  free.  It  boasts  of  no  reserved  treasury 
of  primitive  traditions,  from  whose  dark  recesses  it  may  draw 
forth  auxiliary  troops,  whenever  it  would  assault  some  battery 
of  opposing  truth.  It  pleads  no  commission  to  interpose  be- 
tween God  and  his  people ;  and  to  say  unto  them,  thus  only 
shalt  thou  understand — whatever  else  you  may  believe  it 
means  —  the  proclamation  of  Heaven's  will.  It  reverently 
receives  from  God's  hands  his  own  divine  and  precious  gift. 
It  enthrones  it  in  the  sanctuary.  It  affixes  it  to  every 
sacred  desk.  It  admits  of  no  appeal  beyond  it,  or  from  it. 
This  is  with  it,  the  alpha  and  the  omega  of  all  authority  ;  the 
hearer  of  all  questions  ;  —  the  judge  of  all  controversies  ;  — the 
settler  of  all  disputes,  and  the  fountain  of  all  antiquity.  What- 
ever is  in  this,  it  receives.  Whatever  is  beyond  it,  it  rejects. 
It  turns  away  from  all  the  wisdom,  and  eloquence,  and  power 
of  man,  to  listen  to  the  still  small  voice  of  divine  mercy,  as  it 
comes  forth  from  this  urim  and  thummim  of  the  holy  oracles. 
And  to  doubt  —  cavil  at  —  wantonly  tamper  with  —  alter  — 
amend,  or  add  to,  the  words  and  ordinances  of  this  book,  it 
regards  as  a  spirit,  whose  tendency  is  towards  rationalism  and 
infidelity,  and  that  too  of  the  worst  and  most  fatal  kind. 

While,  therefore,  we  have,  and  should  have,  no  disposition  to 
think  less  charitably  as  to  our  fellow-christians  of  other  denom- 
inations, who  may,  as  conscientiously  as  we,  obey,  as  they  think, 
the  divine  will  ;  we  may  well  think  more  honorably  than  we 
have  done,  of  the  claims  of  our  own  Zion.  We  may  bless  God, 
who  has  preserved  our  churches  from  the  reception  of  doctrines 
which  expose  their  adherents  to  such  inevitable  temptation  to 
tamper  with,  or  irreverently  supersede,  the  teaching  of  God's 
holy  word.  Believing,  as  we  do,  that  the  church  is  "  that  true 
tabernacle  which  the  Lord  pitched,  and  not  man  ;"  and  that  all 
her  arrangements  and  essential  forms,  have  been  designed  by 
this  unerring  Architect,  we  are  reverently  held  back  from  the 


PRELACY  AND  PRESBYTERY  CONTRASTED. 


99 


LECT.    IV.] 

indulgence  of  our  own  sense  of  architectural  beauty,  and  the 
fitness  of  proportion,  by  the  warning  voice  — "  see  that  thou 
make  all  things  according  to  the  pattern  showed  thee  in  the 
mount.'" 


1)  "  In  an  inquiry,  what  is  sin," 
says  Matthew  Henry, (A  Brief  Inquiry 
into  the  Nature  of  Schism,  London, 
1717,  p.  5,)  "  let  those  books  be 
opened  which  must  be  opened  at  the 
great  day.  If  sinners  must  be  judged 
by  those  books  shortly,  let  sin  be 
judged  by  them  now,  and  let  not  any 


man  or  company  of  men  in  the  world 
assume  a  power  to  declare  that  to  be 
sin,  which  the  sovereign  Rector  of  the 
world  hath  not  declared  to  be  so,  lest 
in  so  doing,  they  be  found  steppino- 
into  the  throne  of  God,  who  is  a  jeal- 
ous God,  and  will  not  give  this  branch 
of  his  glory  to  another." 


ADDITIONAL  NOTES  TO  LECTURE  FOURTH. 


NOTE   A. 


On  this  subject,  Bishop  Hurd*  in  exposing  the  folly  of  the  reformers,  in 
allowing  an  appeal  to  the  primitive  fathers  as  interpreters  of  scripture,  re- 
marks: "  When  the  state  of  the  question  was  thus  changed,  it  was  easy  to  see 
what  would  be  the  issue  of  so  much  indiscretion.  The  dispute  was  not  only 
carried  on  in  a  dark  and  remote  scene,  into  which  the  people  could  not  follow 
their  learned  champions,  but  was  rendered  infinitely  tedious,  and  indeed  inter- 
minable ;  for  those  early  writings,  now  to  be  considered,  as  of  the  highest 
authority,  were  voluminous  in  themselves,  and  what  was  worse,  were  com- 
posed in  so  loose,  so  declamatory,  and  often  in  so  hyperbolical  a  strain,  that 
no  certain  sense  could  be  affixed  to  their  doctrines,  and  any  thing  or  every 
thing  miglit  with  some  plausibility  be  proved  from  them. 

"  The  inconvenience  was  sensibly  felt  by  the  protestant  world  ;  and  after  a 
prodigious  waste  of  industry  and  erudition,  a  learned  foreigner  at  length 
showed  the  inutility  and  the  folly  of  pursuing  the  contest  any  further.  In  a 
well-considered  discourse  on  the  Use  of  the  Fathers,  he  clearly  evinced  that 
their  authority  was  much  less  than  was  generally  supposed,  in  all  points  of 
religious  controversy,  and  that  their  judgment  was  especially  incompetent  in 
those  points  which  were  agitated  by  the  two  parties.  He  evinced  this  conclu- 
sion by  a  variety  of  unanswerable  arguments,  and  chiefly  by  showing  that 
the  matters  in  debate  were  for  the  most  part  such  as  had  never  entered  into 
the  heads  of  those  old  writers,  being  indeed  of  much  later  growth,  and  having 
first  sprung  up  in  the  barbarous  ages  ;  they  could  not,  therefore,  decide  on 
questions  which  they  had  no  occasion  to  consider,  and  had  in  fact  never  con- 
sidered, however  their  careless  or  figurative  expression  might  be  made  to  look 
that  way,  by  the  dexterous  management  of  the  controversialists.  This  dis- 
covery had  great  eifect;  it  opened  tlie  eyes  of  the  more  candid  and  intelligent 
inquirers;  and  our  incomparable  Chillingvvorth,  with  some  others,  took  the 
advantage  of  it,  to  set  the  controversy  with  the  church  of  Rome  once  more 
on  its  proper  foot,  and  to  establish  for  ever  the  old  principle,  that  the  Bible, 
and  that  only,  (interpreted  by  our  best  reason,)  is  the  religion  of  protestants." 

The  inconsistency  of  the  reformers,  in  appealing  to  the  fathers,  is  also 
exposed  by  Herbert  Croft,  bishop  of  Hereford,  in  his  Naked  Truth,  or  the 
True  State  of  the  Primitive  Church  :t  "  The  evangelical  doctors,  so  called 
because  they  chiefly  urged  evangelium,  the  gospel,  for  the  defence  of  their 
doctrine,  were  most  of  them  bred  up  from  their  infancy  in  the  popish  church, 
and  therein  taught,  even  to  adore  all  councils  and  fathers,  and  (education  being 
of  great  force  to  command  and  awe  both  the  wills  and  judgments  of  men) 
made  them  very  shy  rnd  timorous  to  reject  that  authority  which  they  had  long 
reverenced  ;  in  modesty,  therefore,  some  of  the  evangelical  doctors  were  con- 
tent to  admit  the  aulhorily  of  fathers  for  three  or  four  of  the  first  centuries  ; 
some  admitted  five  or  six,  whereby  they  were  reduced  sometimes  to  great 
straits  in  their  disputations  ;  lor  though  neither  all  nor  half  the   popish  errors 

*  Introduction  to  the  Pludj-  of  Propli.  Sorm.  xii.  ed.  1839.     London,  p.  24!. 

t  Published  in  1675,  and  to'  be  found  in  Hcott's  Uoll.  of  Tracts,  vol.  vii.  pp.  279  and  2e0, 


NOTES   TO    LECTURE    IV.  101 

can  be  found  in  the  councils  and  fathers  of  these  centuries,  yet  some  of  tiiem 
were  crept  very  early  into  the  church.  Thus  superstition  of  the  cross  and 
ciirvsni  were  in  use  in  the  second  century  ;  the  millenary  error  got  footing 
about  that  time  ;  the  necessity  of  infants  receiving  the  blessed  sacrament  of 
the  Lord's  supper  came  in  soon  after.  About  the  fourth  century,  there  were 
some  touches  in  oratory  sermons,  by  way  of  theoretical  ejaculations,  like  pray- 
ing to  saints,  but  long  after  came  to  be  formally  used  as  now  in  churches  ;  and 
so  superstitions  came  in,  some  at  one  time  and  some  at  another.  The  papists 
themselves  do  not  receive  all  these  errors,  but  reject  some,  as  that  of  the 
millenaries  and  the  necessity  of  infants  receiving  the  Lord's  supper.  Now  I 
ask,  first,  the  papists,  by  what  rule  they  retain  some  of  these  things  and  reject 
others  ?  Secondly,  I  ask  the  evangelical  by  what  rule  they  submit  to  the 
authority  of  some  centuries  and  refuse  others  ?  Both  will  answer  me,  because 
they  believe  some  to  be  erroneous,  some  to  be  orthodox.  Whereby  it  is  evi- 
dent, that  neither  submit  to  the  fathers'  authority  as  commanding  their  judg- 
ments, but  receive  their  opinions  as  agreeing  with  their  judgments." 

"  And  will  you,"  says  Bishop  Croft,*  "be  bound  up  to  all  the  decrees  of 
councils,  without  scripture  or  any  reason  for  them  .''  If  once  we  leave  scrip- 
ture, and  hearken  to  the  doctrine  of  men,  ever  so  holy,  ever  so  learned,  ever  so 
primitive,  we  shall  soon  be  wheedled  into  the  papist's  religion,  and  many 
otlier  errors  which  the  papists  themselves  now  reject,  as  I  have  declared  at 
large  before." 

"  By  the  way,"  says  the  ever-memorable  Hales,  in  his  Tract  on  Schism, 
"  by  this  you  may  plainly  see  the  danger  of  our  appeal  to  antiquity  for  resolu- 
tion in  controversial  points  of  faith,  (he  was  speaking  of  the  dispute  about 
Easter,)  and  how  small  relief  we  are  to  expect  from  thence ;  for  if  the  discre- 
tion of  the  chiefest  guides  and  directors  of  the  church  did,  in  a  point  so  triv- 
ial, so  inconsiderable,  so  mainly  fail  them,  as  not  to  see  the  truth  in  a  subject 
wherein  it  is  the  greatest  marvel  how  they  could  avoid  the  sight  of  it,  can  we, 
without  imputation  of  extreme  grossness  and  folly,  think  so  poor-spirited  per- 
sons competent  judges  of  the  questions  now  on  foot  betwixt  the  churches  ?  " 

That  in  this  controversy  we  must  not  be  tempted  to  give  any  heed  to  prim- 
itive teachers,  further  than  as  sanctioned  by  the  word  of  God,  see  also  London 
Christian  Observer,  1837,  p.  J45.  De  Moor,  in  his  Commentary  on  Marckii 
IMedulla,  volume  vi.  p.  54,  thus  succinctly  gives  the  reasons  then  deemed  suffi- 
cient for  rejecting  this  authority  of  the  fathers  :  "Patres  omnes  fuere  fallibiles, 
nffivis  eterroribus  pluribuslaborarunt,  saspe  dissident,  dubia  non  raro  est  genu- 
initas  scriptorum  quae  sub  nomine  eorum  venditantur,  monumenta  ipsorum 
plurima  perierunt,  controversias  recentiores  ignorarunt,  de  argumentis  variis 
ante  ortam  de  illis  controversiam  securius  locuti  sunt."  Vide  supra  Cap.  ii. 
§  46,  47,  et  Turretine  in  loc.  cit.  §  32—33.  Derhard  Confess.  Cathol.  lib.  i. 
part  ii.  cap.  xiii.     Tom.  i.  p,  549 — 730. 

"  The  writing  of  the  fathers,"  says  the  Rev.  Mr.  Pratt, t  "  may  contain  many 
opinions  which  have  no  reference  to  apostolical  doctrine  or  fellowship  ;  but 
such  opinions  are  held  to  have  no  more  weight  than  the  opinions  of  individ- 
uals;  they  are  not  the  voice  of  the  church,  declaring  the  everlasting  truths 
of  the  gospel  ;  or,  it  may  be,  that  the  writings  of  some  of  the  fathers  contain 
opinions  calculated  rather  to  abrogate  than  to  establish  the  doctrines  of  our 
Lord  and  his  apostles,  and  to  encourage  new  and  strange  practices  ratlier  than 
to  guard  the  primitive  ordinances  and  institutions  of  the  gospel.  In  such 
cases,  the  episcopalian  rejects  the  authority  of  the  fathers,  and  looks  on  their 
opinions  as  vain  or  heretical.  Independent  of  the  scriptures  of  the  Old  and 
New  Testament,  the  writintrs  of  the  fathers  can  have  neither  weight  nor 
authority  in  matters  of  faith." 

That  the  Church  of  England  herself  has  not  perfect  confidence  in  the 
fathers,  see  Calamy's  Def  of  Nonconf  vol.  i.  p.  134.  London,  1703.  See  a 
good  disquisition  on  this  subject,  in  the  "  History  of  Popery,"  by  the  authors 
of  the  Universal  History.     London,  1735,  4to,  vol.  i.    Packet,  xxxi.  p.  128,&<;. 

No  human  authority  can  ever  settle  this  question.     "  You  shelter  yourself," 

*  Nake'l  Truth,  in  ScoH'g  Coll.  of  Tr.  vol.  vii.  p.  3IJ. 
t  The  Old  Paths,  p.  ICO. 


]02  NOTES    TO   LECTURE    IV. 

■ays  Dr.  Bowden  to  Dr.  Miller,*  "  under  Bishop  Taylor,  who,  from  the  quota- 
tions you  give,  seems  to  think  that  they  have  been  corrupted.  If  Taylor  really 
thought  so,  he  is  certainly  very  inconsistent,  for  he  quotes  them  as  freely  as 
any  man,  in  his  Trad  on  Episcopacy,  d^wd  without  uttering  the  least  expression 
of  disapprobation.  If,  then,  you  can  quote  him  as  condemning  them  in  his 
Liberty  of  Prophesying,  I  can  quote  him  as  approving  them  in  his  Tract  on 
Episcopacif,  and  thus  his  testimony  either  way  becomes  perfectly  nugatory." 

The  testimony  of  Jerome  is  treated  in  exactly  the  same  manner  at  p.  49  of 
ibid.  So  also  of  Bishop  Forbes  and  others,  he  says,  (p.  73,)  "  Let  this  be 
exactly  as  you  say,  to  what  does  it  amount.''  Just  this  much:  ^/tcy  thought 
so.  But  I  might  oppose  to  them  full  as  eminent  episcopal  divines.  And  what 
would  the  conclusion  be.''     Precisely  nothing." 

"There  are  so  many  passages  in  their  (the  reformers,  Luther,  Calvin,  and 
some  others)  writings,  which  stand  in  direct  opposition  to  one  another,  that  I 
am  totally  at  a  loss  what  to  think. t  Hence  it  is,  that  they  sometimes  appear 
to  be  perfect  equality  men  ;  at  other  times,  to  assert  as  strongly  as  possible 
inequality.  But  this  is  easily  explained.  They  did  not  hold  an  inequality  of 
order,  but  an  inequality  of  degree.  This  opinion,  the  offspring  of  the  '  dregs 
of  popery,'  preserves  them  from  self-contradiction,  and  in  no  other  way  can 
it  be  done." 

"  Neither  your  testimonies  nor  mine,  have  the  weight  of  a  feather  in  the 
scale  of  evidence ;  for,  on  both  sides,  they  are  nothing  but  opinion,  and  our 
opinion  can  never  determine  a  matter  of  fact." 


NOTE  B. 

The  following  additional  testimonies  are  given  in  a  German  review  of  Mr. 
Manning's  work  on  the  Rule  of  Faith. t 

"  A  mind  which  is  sound,"  says  Irenaus,  "  and  trustworthy,  and  God-fear- 
ing, and  truth-loving,  will,  with  a  ready  devotion,  occupy  itself  in  such  things 
as  God  has  put  in  our  power,  and  subjected  to  our  knowledge.  These  are  the 
things  that  strike  our  very  eyes,  and  are  set  down  in  so  many  words  in  scrip- 
ture, plainly  and  icitltout  any  ambiguity."  —  (Lib.  ii.  c.  46,  ed.  Ferard.) 

Justin  Martyr,  in  his  dialogue  with  Trypho,  proves  the  greatest  mysteries 
of  our  faith,  by  scripture  testimonies,  which,  as  he  says,  are  so  plain  as  to  need 
no  explanation. 

Clement  of  Alexandria  —  "  The  supreme  demonstration  produces  a  scientific 
faith  from  the  citation  and  opening  up  of  scriptures."  —  (Strom,  ii.  p.  38L) 

The  canon  of  interpretation  according  to  him  is,  "  The  harmony  and  concord 
of  the  law  and  the  prophets  with  the  New  Testament."  —  (Strom,  vi.) 

Origcn  thinks  that  even  "  the  difficult  scriptures  are  only  to  be  explained 
by  a  comparison  with  other  scriptures."  —  (Philocal.  c.  ii.  p.  22.) 

Athanasius  assures  Jovian  that  "  The  true  faith  is  manifest  to  all,  being 
known  and  read  in  the  sacred  scriptures."  —  (Ep.  ad.  Jov.  t.  i.  p.  246 ) 

Chrysostom  tells  us  that  "  all  things  are  plain  and  straight  in  scripture  ;  yea, 
all  necessary  things  manifest.  (In  2  Ep.  and  Thessal.)  And  again,  "  The  apos- 
tles, taking  quite  a  different  method  from  the  philosophers,  made  their  doctrine 
clear  and  plain  to  all,  that  such,  by  merely  reading  their  writings,  might  under- 
stand their  meaning."  —  (Hom.  3,  in  Lazar.) 

And  S.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  in  a  passage  quoted  by  Dr.  Manning  himself, 
tells  the  catechumens  not  to  receive  the  creed  itself,  unless  he  could  prove  it 
to  them  by  scripture.  Is  the  scripture  then  to  be  explained  by  the  creed,  and 
yet  the  creed  proved  by  scripture  .-' 

As  collated  by  Dr.  Barrow,  Augustine  and  Lactantius,  thus  clearly  affirm 
our  position  :§  "  I  do  believe,"  says  Augustine,  "  that  also  on  this  side  there 
would  be  most  clear  authority  of  the  divine  oracles,  if  a  man  could  not  be 

*  Letters,  Socond  Series,  vol.  ii.    Works  on  Episcopacy,  p.  56. 
t  Works  on  Episcopacy,  vol.  ii.  pp.  173,  and  178,  and  179. 
t  Lend.  Clir.  Obs.  1841.     p.  173. 
\  See  Wkg.  vol.  i.  p.  562.    Fol.  and  p.  769. 


NOTES    TO    LECTURE    IV.  103 

ignorant  of  it,  without  damage  of  his  salvation  ;  "  and  Lactantius  tiius,  "  Those 
things  can  liave  no  foundation,  or  firmness,  whicii  arc  not  sustained  by  any 
oracle  of  God's  word."  Again,  "  I  will  not  that  the  holy  churcli  be  demon- 
strated from  human  reasonings,  but  the  divine  oracles." 

See  the  quotation  from  Eleutherius,  bishop  of  Tyana,  A.  D.,  431,  "  against 
those  who  declare  that  we  ought  neitlier  to  searcli  into,  nor  speak  from  scrip- 
ture, being  content  with  the  faith  the}'  possess,"  in  Clarke's  Succ.  of  Sacr. 
Lit.  vol.  ii.  p.  1!37.  See  similar  sentiments  from  Theodoret,  Cyril  and  Basil, 
in  Usher's  Answ.  to  tlie  Jesuit,  p.  35.  See  also  Cyprian,  Epist.  63  and  (i4. 
TerluUian,  lib.  de  Veland.  Virg.  cap.  1.     And  lib.  de  Amma,  cap.  28. 

NOTE   C. 

We  will  here  add  some  additional  testimonies  and  remarks. 
Mr.  Keble,  in  his  Primitive  Tradition,  says,  "  he  does  not  see  how  without  its 
aid,"  ("  the  chain  of  primitive  tradition  ")  "the  vey  outward  face  of  God's 
church  and  kingdom  among*  us  could  now  be  retained,"  and  he  enumerates 
as  among  "  the  points  of  catholic  consent  known  by  tradition,"  and  which 
"  constitute  the  ties  and  knots  of  the  whole  system,"  "  the  apostolical  suc- 
cession."! 

So  on  p.  76  he  expects  from  this  tradition  "  the  proving  the  existing  church 
syste?n  divine  in  many  points  where  they  ignorantly  supposed  it  human."  t 

Nevertheless,  this  same  writer  has  this  declaration:  '•  it  is  among  tlie  privi- 
leges reserved  for  serious  inquiring  piety,  to  discern  an  express  will  of  God, 
as  well  in  these  ecclesiastical  laws,  as  in  others  more  immediately." § 

The  following  is  the  confession  of  bisliop  Croft  in  his  Naked  Truth  or  the 
True  State  of  the  Primitive  Church  :||  "  And  I  hope  my  readers  will  see 
what  weak  proof's  are  brought  for  this  distinction  and  superiority  of  order  —  no 
scripture,  no  primitive  general  council,  no  general  consent  of  primitive  doctors 
and  fathers,  no,  not  one  primitive  father  of  note  speaking  particularly  and  home 
to  our  purpose  ;  only  a  touch  of  Epiphanius  and  St.  Austin  upon  Aerius,  the 
Arian  heretic,  but  not  declared,  no,  not  by  tliem,  an  heretic  in  this  particular 
of  episcopicy." 

Professor  Powell,  of  Oxford,  in  his  Tradition  Unveiled,  says  of  the  high- 
church  party,  that  "  the  traditionists  readily  allow  (which  iiivsl  iip])enr  to  a 
strict  inquiier;  that  ail  such  appeal  to  wrillen  evidence  alone  is  iitfeily  insuffi- 
cient to  establish  the  point.  No  su''h  institution,  comph-tt'  ;ind  distinct,  is  to 
be  found  in  the  New  Testament,  positively  delivered,  or  strictly  deducible  ;  no 
code  of  its  constitution  laid  down  like  the  Levitical  in  the  Old.  Tradition, 
however,  supplies  the  deficiency."   - 

This  silence  of  scripture  is  admitted  by  bishop  Skinner,  who  offers  some 
solution  of  the  fact.  See  his  Vindication,  p.  134,  and  Dr.  Mitchell's  Letters, 
p.  59,  &c. 

The  same  thing  is  admitted  by  Dr.  Cooke.  "  How,"  he  asks,  IT  "  can  the 
scripture  assert  beforehand  that  a  thing  is  done?  (that  they  succeed,  in  the 
present  tense  )  'What  Episcopalians,  therefore,  would  be  simple  enough  to 
expect  to  find  a  passage  in  scripture,  asserting  that  the  bls/iops  do  svccred  the 
apostles  in  their  apostolic  office  .'  "  However  this  be,  it  might  reasonably  have 
been  expected  that  the  scriptures  would  have  made  it  pbiin  that  it  was  the  pur- 
pose of  God  that  prelates  alone  should  succeed  the  apostles. 

That  the  claims  of  prelacy  rest,  after  all,  upon  patristic  tradition,  is  evident 
from  the  whole  tenor  of  Dr.  Bowden's  Letters.  See  Wks.  on  Episcop,  vol.  i. 
pp.  106,  115,  116. 

It  is  here,  therefore,  to  be  ob.served,  that  even  were  this  doctrine  embodied  in 
the  present  standards  of  the  English  church,"  *  "  she  did  not  take  her  direc- 
tion from  the  scriptures  only,  but  also  from  the  councils  and  examples  of  the 
four  or  five  first  centuries,  to  which  she  labored  to  conform  her  reformation. 

*  4th  edn.  p.  :JS.  I|  See  p.  19.     See  also  pp.  !S,  B.?,  59. 

t  See  also  p.  78.  H  Wks.  on  Episc.  'Vol.  ii.  p.  211. 

i  See  do.  pp.  39,  40.  *  *  Dr.  Owen,  vol.  17,  p.  235. 
$  Scott's  Coll.  of  Tr.  vol.  vii.  p.  306. 


104  NOTES    TO    LECTURE    IV. 

Let  the  question  now  be,  whether  tliere  be  no  corruptions  in  this  Church  of 
England,  supposing  such  a  natural  state  to  bo  instituted.  Wliat  1  beseech 
you,  shall  bind  my  conscience  to  acquiesce  in  what  is  [)leaded  from  tlie  four 
or  five  first  centuries,  consisting  of  men  that  could  and  did  err,  more  than 
that  did  hers,  which  was  pleaded  from  the  nine  or  ten  centuries  followinj." 

Now  if  this  doctrine  of  succession  is  by  tradition,  tlien  it  cannot —  as  prelat- 
ists  make  it  —  be  of  the  substance  of  doctrine,  or  among  things  necessary  to 
salvation  ;  for  this  kind  of  tradition  is  tiiat  which  the  church  rejects,  which 
Taylor  repudiates,  and  in  whose  disparagement  Mr.  Keble  himself  inconsis- 
tently joins.  "  In  practical  matters,"  it  is  said,  "  tradition  may  be  received,  but 
in  doctrinal  (with  the  exception  of  the  creed)  it  cannot."  —  (Kcble,  on  Prim. 
Trad.  p.  71.)  Again,  "all  necessary  credcnda,  all  truths  essential  to  salva- 
tion, are  contained  in  scripture  itself."  —  (Keble,  p.  74.) 

It  follows,  therefore,  that  either  this  whole  doctrine  is  not  fundamental,  or 
necessary,  and  therefore  prelacy  is  self-condemned ;  or  if  it  is  fundamental,  it 
cannot  be  proved,  or  verified  by  tradition,  but  must  be  contained  i)i  scripture. 
But  this,  it  is  granted  it  is  not,  in  any  certain  and  palpable  form  ;  and  there- 
fore, to  affirm,  as  do  these  writers,  that  its  rejection  unchurches  and  unchris- 
tianizes  other  communions,  is  as  grossly  absurd  in  reason,  as  it  is  heretical  in 
doctrine,  and  uncharitable  in  spirit. 


LECTURE    V. 


THE    TESTS    BY   WHICH    THIS   PRELATICAL    DOCTRINE    OP   APOSTOLICAL 

SUCCESSION    MUST    BE    TRIED. 

That  we  may  once  more  illustrate  the  nature  of  the  doctrine 
of  apostolical  succession,  we  ask  a  candid  examination  of  the 
following  passages,  which  are  all  extracted  from  "  The  Church- 
man," published  in  New  York,  under  the  sanction  of  Bishop 
Onderdonk  :  the  first  is  from  Dodwell,  an  English  writer  quoted 
in  the  Oxford  tracts  —  the  second  from  Dr.  Hook,  an  English 
divine  of  the  Oxford  tract  stamp  —  the  third  from  an  Address 
on  Unity  by  Dr.  Onderdonk,  Bishop  of  New  York — the  fourth 
from  a  correspondent. 

1.  "None  but  the  bishops  can  unite  us  to  the  Father  and 
the  Son.  Whence  it  will  follow,  that  whosoever  is  disunited 
from  the  visible  communion  of  the  church  on  earth,  and  partic- 
ularly from  the  visible  communion  of  the  bishops,  must  conse- 
quently be  disunited  from  the  whole  visible  catholic  church  on 
earth  ;  and  not  only  so,  but  from  the  invisible  communion  of 
the  holy  angels  and  saints  in  heaven,  and  what  is  yet  more, 
from  Christ  and  God  himself.  It  is  one  of  the  most  dreadful 
aggravations  of  the  condition  of  the  damned,  that  they  are 
banished  from  the  presence  of  the  Lord  and  the  glory  of  his 
power.  The  same  is  their  condition,  also,  who  are  disunited 
from  Christ  by  being  disunited  from  his  visible  representative.^' 

2.  "Unless  Christ  be  spiritually  present  with  the  ministers 
of  religion  in  their  services,  those  services  will  be  vain ;  but  the 
only  ministrations  to  which  he  has  promised  his  presence,  are 
those  of  bishops,  who  are  successors  to  the  first  commissioned 
apostles,  and  to  the  other  clergy  acting  under  their  sanction 
and  by  their  authority." 

3.  "  None  but  the  bishops  can  unite  us  to  the  Father,  in  the 

14 


106  THE    NATURE    OF    THEIR    CLAIMS.  [lECT.  V. 

way  of  Christ's  appointment,  and  these  bishops  must  be  such 
as  receive  their  mission  from  the  first  commissioned  apostles. 
Wherever  such  bishops  are  found  dispensing  the  faith  and  sacra- 
ment of  Christ,  there  is  a  true  church  ;  unsound  it  may  be, 
hke  the  church  of  Rome,  but  still  a  true  or  real  church,  —  as  a 
sick  or  diseased  man,  though  unsound,  is  still  a  real  or  true 
man." 

4.  "  By  being  duly  admitted  members  of  the  church  of 
Christ,  men  are  placed  in  a  covenant  relation  to  God,  in  which 
he  gives  them,  on  certain  conditions,  a  title  to  the  benefits  of 
Christ's  mediation.  The  means  and  pledges  of  this  title's  be- 
ing made  effectual,  are  the  sacraments,  services,  and  ordinances 
of  this  church." 

Now,  as  prelatists  have  "  suspended  the  validity  of  their 
own  ministry  and  ordinances,  and  the  whole  Christianity  of  all 
their  people,"  and  their  claim  to  be  regarded  as  a  church  of 
Christ  at  all,  upon  this  doctrine  of  an  unbroken  line  of  valid 
and  successive  prelatical  ordinations,  from  the  existing  incum- 
bents up  to  the  apostles  themselves,  into  whom,  as  into  a  foun- 
tain of  episcopal  grace,  they  all  empty  themselves  —  we  will 
proceed  to  expose  the  utter  groundlessness  and  absurdity  of 
this  vaunted  prerogative.     Res  est  ridicula  et  nimis  jocosa.^ 

Having  disposed  of  this  subject,  we  shall  then  proceed  to 
show  what  is  the  true  doctrine  of  apostolic  succession  ;  and 
that  presbyterianism,  both  as  it  regards  its  doctrines  and  its  or- 
der, is  accordant  to  the  apostolic  platform. 

This  exclusive  claim  to  be  the  church,  and  the  only  true 
church,  and  the  only  conveyancer  of  heavenly  grace,  we  may 
consider  as  a  fact  to  be  proved,  and  as  a  right  to  be  established. 
Now,  in  making  good  these  pretensions,  there  are  certain  ac- 
knowledged principles  or  canons  which  have  been  ratified  by 
prelatical  adoption,  and  by  which  they  may  be  tested. 

The  succession  which  is  thus  claimed  by  prelates,  is  not  a 
succession  of  christians,  nor  of  ministers,  but  of  prelates  ;  for 
episcopal  ordination  does  not,  we  are  told,  confer  any  right  or 
power  whatever  to  transmit  the  sacred  gift  and  grace,  except  in 
the  one  order  of  prelates.  It  is,  therefore,  a  personal  and  ex- 
clusive succession  of  prelates  which  is  to  be  made  manifest. 
It  must  then  be  shown  not  only  that  the  church  has  ever  exist- 
ed —  not  only  that  officiating  ministers  have  ever  been  found  in 
that  church  —  not  only  that  there  have  ever  been  an  order  of 
men  calling  themselves  prelates  —  but  it  must  be  shown,  that 
there  has  been  an  unbroken  succession  of  true  prelates  —  from 

])  Catullus. 


LECT.  V.J  WHAT    PRELATISTS    MUST    PROVE.  107 

the  apostles'  days  down  to  the  present  time.  For,  if  there  is 
nny  reasonable  doubt,  as  to  any  one  link  in  this  lengthened 
chain,  then  is  their  proud  boast  made  vain. 

But,  should  prelatists  even  succeed  in  carrying  their  chain,  in 
its  unbroken  continuity,  up  to  the  apostles,  and  thus  bridge  over 
the  dark  chaos  of  intervening  time  —  they  will  be  required  to 
fasten  it  surely  and  strongly  to  the  rock  of  ages.  They  must 
point  out  and  make  manifest  where  and  how,  it  has  entered,  as 
an  anchor  sure  and  stedfast,  and  is  infixed  in  the  good  founda- 
tion of  the  apostles  and  prophets,  Jesus  Christ  himself  being  the 
chief  corner-stone. 

It  will  not  do  for  prelatists  to  deal  with  this  doctrine  of  apos- 
tolical succession,  as  the  Romanists  do  with  that  of  infallibility. 
This  they  assume,  as  the  basis  of  their  system,  and  as  in  itself 
necessary,  as  the  ground  and  security  of  the  entire  building. 
But,  as  Mr.  Newman  in  reasoning  with  the  Romanists  remarks, 
this  "  cannot  be  taken  for  granted  as  a  first  principle  in  the 
controversy,  for  if  so,  nothing  remains  to  be  proved,  and  the 
controversy  is  at  an  end."  In  like  manner  do  we  say,  in  argu- 
ing with  prelatists :  That  principle,  on  which  the  excommuni- 
cation of  all  the  protestant  churches  in  the  world  is  to  be 
based,  must  be  shown  to  rest  upon  no  dubious  interpretation  — 
upon  no  questionable  meanings,  —  no  interpolated  opinions  of 
uninspired  and  unauthoritative  men  —  no  figment  of  the  universal 
consent  of  the  early  church,  founded  upon  the  doubtful  re- 
mains of  comparatively  a  few,  self-contradictory  fathers. 

But,  as  Mr.  Newman  says  of  the  Romish  doctrine  referred^to, 
that  Romanists  are  obliged  to  maintain  it  by  their  very  preten- 
sions to  be  considered  the  one,  true,  catholic,  and  apostolic 
church,'  —  so  also  do  we  affirm  of  prelatists,  that  they  also  are 
obliged  to  maintain  this  unauthenticated  and  equally  prepos- 
terous dogma,  by  their  very  pretensions  to  be  considered  the 
one,  true,  catholic,  and  apostolic,  church.  The  absurdity,  how- 
ever, with  which  such  a  course  is  chargeable,  is  in  both  cases, 
equally  apparent ;  and  the  reasonableness  of  our  rejection  of 
both,  until  proved  by  a  divine  warrant,  and  fully  established  in 
all  their  parts,  equally  obvious. 

Nor  is  this  all.  For,  even  c6uld  we  suppose  that  it  had 
been  discovered  in  the  apostolic  writings,  that  such  an  order  of 
ministers  as  prelates  had  been  ordained  in  the  churches  estab- 
lished by  the  apostles,  —  as,  for  instance,  Timothy  and  Titus; 
-it  would  be  still  further  necessary  to  prove,  that  this  order 
was  instituted  by  the  apostles  as  a  perpetual  and    unalterable 

1)  See  Lectures  on  Romanism,  p.  G3,  &c. 


108  WHAT   PRELATISTS   MUST  PROVE.  [lECT.  V. 

order  of  the  church.  Reason  would  demand,  that  "  we  should 
hesitate  awhile,  before  we  regard  the  institutors  of  a  new 
RELIGION,  in  appointing  its  ministers,  or  even  their  method 
of  proceeding  in  naming  their  successors,  as  absolutely  conclu- 
sive in  favor  of  the  same  method  in  after  times  ;  inasmuch  as  no 
other  plan  may  be  supposable  as  proper  or  practicable  at  the 
commencement  of  a  new  order  of  things  ;  and  yet,  some  other 
plan  be  both  possible  and  more  eligible,  when  this  same  econo- 
my has  run  on  through  a  tract  of  time."^  Apostolic  prece- 
dent is  only  binding  where  it  is  of  the  nature  of  an  apos- 
tolic precept,  where  it  is  given  in  the  exercise  of  apostolic 
inspiration,  and  with  the  forethought  of  apostolic  prescience. 
The  apostles  themselves  distinguish  between  what  is  essential 
as  a  necessary  principle,  and  what  is  expedient  for  the  present 
necessity ;  between  what,  in  certain  circumstances,  may  be  a 
duty,  while,  in  other  circumstances,  it  may  be  a  matter  of  per- 
fect liberty  and  indifference,'^  That  this  rule  is  necessary,  ap- 
pears from  the  admission  made  by  these  divines,  that  "ordina- 
tion, episcopacy,  &;c.  come  under  the  category  of  rites  and 
discipline,"  and  yet,  that  "  rites  are  found  in  scripture,  which 
every  one  admits  to  be  changeable."^ 

But,  what  is  still  more  to  the  point,  in  order  to  establish  the 
designed  perpetuity  of  such  an  institution,  it  must  be  shown,  as 
Mr.  Palmer  testifies,  that  it  was  "  enacted  by  the  authority," 
not  of  "  some  of  the  apostles  "  merely  ;  but  "  by  all  the  apos- 
tles, under  the  express  direction  of  the  Holy  Ghost."*  "It  may 
be  affirmed,"  to  apply  the  conclusion  of  this  writer,  "  that  unless 
there  is  evidence  that  this  system  was  instituted  for  a  per- 
manent object,  or  was  to  be  transmitted  to  others,  it  cannot  by 
any  means  be  proved  a  matter  of  faith  ;  and  therefore,  even  if 
we  were  to  concede,  that  "  this  system  was,  in  fact,  followed 

1)  Spiritual  Despotism,  p.  149.  that  he  was  directed  to  do  so,  for  in- 

2)  See  Calvin's  Instit.  B.  iv.  ch.  spired  men  did  many  things,  merely 
X.  §  XX.  and  ch.  xix.  §  xxx.  "  We  do  on  the  ground  of  human  expediency." 
not,"  says  Dr.  Howe,  (Vind.  p.  354,)  "  What  if  baptism  was  administered 
"  rest  the  obligation  of  episcopacy  on  to  heathen  converts  ?  It  was  not 
the  ground  of  its  existence  in  the  done,  so  far  as  we  know,  by  divine 
primitive  church,  but  on  the  ground  appointment."  See  also  Dr.  Milch- 
tliat  the  apostles,  acting  under  the  ell's  Letters  to  Bishop  Skinner,  p.  G9. 
commission,  and  in  conformity  to  the  3)  See  illustrated  by  examples, 
will  of  Clirist, established  itasthereg-  Palmer,  vol.  ii.  p.  70.  "  It  universally 
u\a.T  a.nd  permanent  method  of  confer-  acknowledged,"  says  Dr.  Bowden, 
ring  tlie  sacerdotal  power."  This  prin-  "  that  several  apostolic  usages  are  not 
ciple  is  also  admitted  by  Dr.  Bowden,  binding,  because  the  apostles,  in  such 
in  arguing  on  the  subject  of  the  syna-  cases,  did  not  act  on  the  ground  of 
gogues.  (Works  on  Episcop.vol.il.  divine  authority."  (Letters,  2d  series, 
p.   H-'J.)     "Ezra's  being   an   inspired  jii.  p.  21.) 

man,  is  no  proof  that  he  established  4)  See  illustrated    by  examples, 

them  ;  but  if  he  did,  it  is  no  proof     Palmer,  vol.  ii.  p.  7L 


LECT.  v.]  WHAT  PRELATI3TS   MUST   TROVE.  109 

by  the  apostles,  as  is  pretended,"  "  its  divine  right  would  not 
be  established."^  For,  unless  it  can  be  thus  "  proved  from 
scripture,  it  is  no  article  of  faith,  notwithstanding  the  rash 
assertions  of  some  modern  theologians  to  the  contrary."^ 

But  again,  that  we  may  advance  to  another  point.  Were  we 
required  by  proof,  plain  and  sufficient,  to  admit  that  the  system 
of  diocesan  prelacy  was  instituted  by  apostolic  authority,  as  a 
permanent  ordinance  in  the  church  ;  a  further  requisition  must 
be  met,  before  its  exclusive  title  to  the  prerogatives  of  the  church 
of  Christ  can  be  admitted.  Many  of  the  most  important  and 
learned  writers,  —  and  among  them  not  a  few  who  have  adhered 
most  conscientiously  to  the  prelatic  form  of  church  government, 
—  have  been  of  the  opinion,  that,  on  scripture  evidence  alone, 
an  assent  could  never  be  demanded  for  this,  or  any  existing  and 
completed  form  of  church  polity ;  but  that,  with  the  approba- 
tion or  permission  of  the  apostles,  the  particular  nature  and 
order  of  the  ecclesiastical  constitution  of  any  particular  church, 
was  made  to  accord  with  the  national  sentiments  and  civil 
usages  of  christians,  in  the  different  countries  and  provinces 
where  Christianity  was  established.  Many  variations  and  anoma- 
lies in  the  distribution  of  offices,  the  order  of  proceedure,  and  the 
mode  of  government,  were,  it  is  by  these  parties  believed,  act- 
ually found  in  the  apostolic  churches  ;  and  that  it  was  only  in  the 
course  of  centuries,  the  churches  became  so  fused  and  melted, 
as  to  form  but  one  homogeneous  mass.  In  the  affirmation,  that 
prelacy,  as  now  modelled,  was  matured  in  the  first  age  of  the 
church,  it  is  believed  by  such  writers,  that  "common  sense  is 
insulted  and  historic  evidence  outraged,  by  affirming  it  to  have 
been  a  fact."^ 

But,  in  order  to  authenticate  the  divine  right  of  prelacy  to 
the  monopoly  of  grace,  it  is  obviously  necessary,  that  it  should 
be  made  manifest  by  the  clear  declarations  of  the  lawgiver,  that 
such  was  his  predetermined  purpose  and  decree.  This,  then, 
is  a  fourth  condition  in  the  argument  for  the  exclusive  assump- 
tions of  prelacy.  It  would  not  suffice,  for  this  end,  to  show 
from  undoubted  scripture  authority,  that  prelatic  orders  are 
valid  and  allowable,  but  that  they  are  necessary,  and,  therefore, 
binding.  It  must  be  '•  proved  "  that  these  prelatic  dogmas  are 
"  articles  of  faith,"  and  that  they  are  so  taught  in  the  Bible.^  And 
this  proof  must  be  perfectly  sufficient,  for  it  is  enough  to  destroy 
the  claim  of  any  such   rites  or   discipline   to  be  considered  as 

1)  Palmer,  vol.  ii.  J).  49G,  in  argu-  3)  See  Spiritual  Despotism,  pp. 
ing  against  the  supremacy  of  Peter.  160,  103, 16G,  and  pp.  118  and  ll'J. 
See  also  pp.  4'J4  and  493.                                    4)  Palmer,  ii.  p.  4G5. 

2)  Ibid,  p.  505  on  do. 


1 10  WHAT   PRELATISTS    MUST    PROVE.  [lECT.  V. 

articles  of  faith,  that  their  definite  and  exclusive  appointment  as 
the  only  allowable  forms  of  christian  polity,  is  doubtful/  Facts 
obscurely  revealed,  and  practices  inferenlially  deduced  from 
incidental  allusions,  can  never  be  made  authoritative  and  bind- 
ing on  the  conscience.  "  It  is  not  in  any  such  form,  that  law 
has  ever  been  promulgated.  No  legislator  has  so  tortured  the 
ingenuity  of  any  people."  And  since  Christianity  is  distin- 
guished from  Judaism  by  being  a  system  of  principles,  instead 
of  forms ;  a  code  of  doctrines,  rather  than  a  ritual ;  a  digest  of 
essential  elements,  and  not  a  huge  collection  of  minute  circum- 
stantials ;  —  we  require  nothing  more  to  disprove  the  asserted 
obligatory  character  of  any  imposition  which  is  forced  upon  us, 
than  that  "  the  primitive  practice  in  such  a  matter  is  clearly  not 
clear."  The  only  council  which  assembled  under  the  guidance 
of  inspired  men,  has  emblazoned,  in  the  forefront  of  Christianity, 
its  distinctive  character,  when  they  left  on  record  this  decree  — 
"it  seemed  good  to  the  Holy  Ghost  and  to  us  to  lay  upon  you 
no  greater  burden  than  these  necessary  things."^  "  Never- 
theless, and  with  this  very  proclamation  before  our  eyes,  we 
may  make  the  apostles  despots,  if  we  will  thrust  them  into  the 
iron  chair  of  tyranny,  and  extort  law  from  their  lips,  where  in 
fact  they  have  uttered  no  decree.'"  We  acknowledge,  there- 
fore, no  right  of  legislation  where  Christ  has  left  us  at  liberty, 
nor  will  we  be  bound  by  the  commandments  or  traditions  of  any 
men,  however  loudly  they  may  trumpet  their  own  praises,  and 
herald  their  empty  denunciations. 

These  four  canons  being  observed,  in  discovering  to  us  the 
undoubted  commencement  of  this  chain  of  the  apostolical  suc- 
cession of  prelatical  bishops ;  we  shall  be  canonically  equipped 
for  an  entrance  upon  the  investigation  of  its  more  lengthened 
continuance.  Here  also,  however,  there  are  certain  rules  by 
which,  in  this  all-important  inquiry,  we  must  be  most  cautiously 
guided.  For,  as  we  have  already  shown,  prelates  themselves, 
both  Romanists  and  protestants,  have  staked  their  present  claims 
to  the  character  of  THE  church  of  Christ, upon  the  fact, as  they 
state  it,  that  "the  succession  of  prelates  (bishops)  from  the  apostles 
has  preserved  and  transmitted  from  one  generation  to  another,  the 
IDENTITY  of  the  church.'"  This  is  "shown,"  say  they  "to  be 
the  unanswerable  argument  for  the  truth  of  Christianity  "* — "  was 
maintained  as  the  great  pillar  of  the  church  by  the  men  on  whom 

1)  Seo  Palmer,  vol.  ii.  pp.  458,  4)  British   Critic,  1S39,  No.  52, 
4G7,  472,  473,  474.                                      p.  2r.7. 

2)  Acts,  XV.  28.  5)  Leslie's  Short  and  Eas^y  Metii- 
3  Spiritual    Despotism,   p.    12J.      od,  vol.  iii.  p.  2. 

See  also  p.  103 


LECT.  v.]  THE   VIRTUES   OF   THIS    SUCCESSION.  Ill 

the  Anglican  theology  rests  and  is  founded,'" — and  is  "  the  only- 
ground"  on  which  is  based  that  claim  of  respect  and  attention, 
which  they  make^  and  upon  which  they  can  boldly  meet  Roman- 
ism and  dissent/"  The  whole  fabric  of  Christianity  is,  we  are 
assured,  virtually  connected  with  it.'  So  that,  where  it  is  lost, 
*'  the  overthrow  of  the  church,  and  the  gospel  of  Christ,  has  fol- 
lowed also."^  Its  rejection  is  the  source  of  all  errors  and  heresies,6 
while  it  is  made  the  fountain  of  all  those  other  opinions  and 
practices,  to  which  we  object  in  the  system  of  high-church  pre- 
lacy ;  and  by  which  we  believe  it  to  be,  so  far  forth,  identified  first 
with  the  Nicene,  and  afterwards  with  the  Romish  church,  in  the 
corruptions  and  errors  which  characterized  their  apostacy  from 
the  simplicity  and  purity  of  the  gospel.  Hear  what  is  said  on 
this  point :  "  This,"  that  is,  the  apostolical  succession,  "  is  the  ru- 
dimental  truth  on  which  all  the  churches  rest.  They  have  gone 
forward  from  one  truth  to  another;  from  the  apostolical  commis- 
sion to  the  succession ;  from  the  succession  to  the  office ;  in  the 
office  they  have  discerned  the  perpetual  priesthood,  the  perpet- 
ual sacrifice  ;  in  the  sacrifice  the  glory  of  the  christian  church,  its 
power  as  a  fount  of  grace,  and  its  blessedness  as  a  gate  to  heaven." 
"There  is  no  conceivable  point  of  opinion,  or  practice,  or  ritual, 
or  usage,  in  the  church  system,  ever  so  minute  — no  detail  of  faith 
or  conduct  ever  so  extreme,  but  what  might  be  a  legitimate  and 
necessary  result  of  that  one  idea,  or  formula."^ 

1)  See  Catena  Patrum,  on  the  her  well-being."  Letter,  p.  183, 
Apost.  Success,  in  Oxf.  Tr.  No.  74 ;      Eng.  ed. 

where  are  named  Hooker,  Andrews,  The  supreme  importance  to  be  at- 

Hall,    Bramhall,    Mede,     Sanderson,  tached  to  this  investigation  into   the 

Hammond,   Jeremy  Taylor,   Heyhn,  tests   by  which  the  validity   of  this 

Pearson,  Bull,  Stillingfleet,  Ken,  Bev-  succession  must  be  approved,  is  mani- 

eridge.  Wake,  Potter,  Nelson,   Law,  fest.     "  If  the  succession,"    says  Dr. 

Johnson,    Dodwell,    Collier,    Leslie,  Chandler,   (Appeal   in  Behalf  of  the 

Wilson,   Bingham,  Samuel  Johnson,  Ch.  of  Eng.  in  America,  N.  Y.  17G7, 

Home,  Jones  of  Nay  land,   Horsley,  p.  4,)  "  be  once  broken,  and  the  power 

Heber,  Jebb,  Van  Mildert,  and  Mant.  of   ordination,    once  lost,"  as    it    is 

2)  Oxf.  Tr.  No.  1,  vol.  i.  on  their  theory  by  invalidity,  "  not  all 

3)  Ibid,  Tract  74.  the  men  on  earth,  not  all  the  angels 

4)  Palmer,  vol.  ii.  p.  49  in  heaven,  without  an  immediate  com- 

5)  Mr.  Manning's  Append.  p.ll3.  mission  from  Christ,  can  restore  it." 

6)  See  Oxf  Tr.  vol.  i.p.  383.  "Admit,"  says  Dr.  Howe,  (Vindication 

7)  See  a  very  elaborate  article  on  of  the  Prot.  Episcopal  Church,  p.  347.) 
"the  American  Church,"  in  whose  "for  the  sake  of  testing  a  principle,  that 
praise  this  is  spoken,  in  the  British  the  succession  should  be  interrupted, 
Critic,  Oct.  1839,  pp.  308,  300,  where  how  would  the  priestly  office  be 
reference  is  given  to,  and  quotations  conferred  ?  There  would  be  no  per- 
made  from  American  bishops.  See  son  on  earth,  according  to  the  siipposi- 
also  Palmer,  vol.  ii.  p.  529, 5i30.  Thus  tion,  possessed  of  the  ordaining  power. 
Dr.  Pusey  speaks  of  "  rites,  practices  It  follows,  that  the  sacerdotal  office 
and  observances,  (such  as  fasting,  would  perish,  unless  God  should  be 
ember  days,)  which  she  (the  church  pleased  again  miraculously  to  inter- 
by  virtue  of  this  authority)  has  ever  pose."  "There  is  a  perfect  analogy 
observed,  and  which  are  essential  to  in  this  particular  between  the  Bible 


112 


WHAT   PRELATISTS    MUST   PROVE. 


[lect.  V. 


Such,  ihen,  being  the  issues  dependent  upon  the  determina- 
tion of  this  question,  it  is  all-important  that  it  should  be  most  ac- 
curately weighed. 

It  must  first,  therefore,  be  shown,  that  no  link  is  wanting  in 
this  chain  of  personal  succession,  from  the  first  successor  of  the 
apostles  down  to  the  present  time.  In  demanding  the  most 
perfect  proof  of  the  purity  and  perfection  of  every  link,  in  the 
several  chains,  that  bind  each  church  to  the  apostles,  and  by 
which  they  are  invested  with  that  "  plenitude  of  sacerdotal 
power  which  constitutes  episcopacy'"  —  we  only  ask  what  they 


and  the  priesthood.  An  uninterrupted 
succession  of  true  copies  is  necessary 
to  the  former  ;  an  uninterrupted  suc- 
cession of  true  ordainers  is  necessary 
to  the  latter.  If  either  succession  be 
really  interrupted,  the  interruption 
must  be  fatal,  until  God  shall  be 
pleased  to  interpose."  (Ibid.  See  also 
Percival  on  the  Apost.  Succ.  pp.51, 
53,  Am.  ed.) 

Bishop  Ravenscrofl  thus  lays  down 
the  law  :  "  As  the  ministerial  charac- 
ter is  a  divine  right  to  transact  the 
affairs  of  Christ's  kingdom,  ordina- 
tion must  consequently  be  the  only 
evidence  (miracles  excepted)  of  divine 
right  —  the  substitute  to  us  for  mirac- 
ulous attestation  to  the  ministerial 
communion."  (Vind.  and  Def.  in 
Evang.  and  Lit.  Magazine,  vol.  ix. 
p.  539.) 

The  wily  Romanist,  the  author  of 
the  "  Nullity,"  a  paper  answered  by 
Burnet,  thus  argues :  "  They  are  no 
bishops,  (bond.  Chr.  Obs.  1838,  p. 
825,  and  Ed.  obs.  p.  626,)  because  their 
form  of  ordination  is  essentially  in- 
valid and  null,  seeing  it  cannot  be 
valid,  (no  more  than  that  of  priest- 
hood,) unless  it  be  in  fit  words,  which 
signifies  the  order  given ;  as  Mr. 
Mason  says,  in  his  VindicifE  Ecclesite 
Anglicanffi,  lib.  i.  c.  IG,  n.  G,  in  these 
terms :  Not  any  words  can  serve 
for  this  institution,  but  such  as  are  fit 
to  express  the  power  of  the  order 
given.  And  the  reason  is  evident, 
because  ordination,  being  a  sacrament, 
(as  the  same  author  says,  lib.  i.  n  8, 
and  Doctor  Bramhall,  p.  96,  of  the 
consecration  of  protestant  bishops.) 
that  is,  a  visible  sign  of  invisible  grace 
given  by  it,  there  must  be  some 
visible  sign  or  words  in  the  form  of  it, 
to  signify  the  power  given,  and  to 
determine  the  matter  (which  is  the 
imposition  of  hand.s,  of  itself  a  dumb 
sign,  and  common  to  priests  and  dea- 


cons, confirming,  curing,  &c.)  to  the 
grace  of  episcopal  order."  "  We  sin- 
cerely believe,"  they  add,  "that  upon 
the  non-spiritual  principles  assumed 
by  the  objector,  the  orders  of  the 
Church  of  England  would  be  invalid." 

But  there  are  many  questions  we, 
in  our  turn,  might  put  both  to  Angli- 
can and  Roman  prelatists.  As  for 
instance,  "  Was  Ignatius,  (Dr.  Mitch- 
ell's Pres.  Letters,  p.  219,)  the  bishop 
of  Antioch,  ordained  by  the  laying  on 
of  hands  .''  Dr.  Wake  seems  to  doubt 
of  it  much.  We  have  seen  that 
Gregory  Thaumaturgus  was  not  or- 
dained to  the  charge  of  the  seventeen 
by  imposition  of  hands,  no  more  than 
by  two  or  three  bishops,  and  conse- 
quently never  was  ordained.  Fru- 
mentius  was  the  apostle  of  the  In- 
dians ;  and  it  was  not  till  after  he  had 
been  employed  in  converting  them, 
that  Athanasius  ordained  him.  The 
king  of  the  Iberians  was  employed, 
with  success,  in  the  conversion  of  hi3 
subjects,  before  he  was  so  much  as 
baptized,  and  his  history  does  not 
say,  that  he  ever  was  ordained. 
Olaus  Fringesson,  king  of  Norway, 
first  converted  his  own  subjects,  and 
then  fitted  out  ships,  and  went  on 
board,  with  a  sufficient  number  of 
learned  men  and  disciplined  troops, 
and  in  his  apostolic  circumnaviga- 
tion, converted  a  great  number  of  his 
pagan  allies  and  dependents,  without 
ever  thinking  of  being  ordained." 

We  find,  by  a  very  recent  possession 
of  "  Dr.  Mitchell's  Presbyterian  Let- 
ters,  addressed  to  Bishop  Skinner," 
(London,  1809,)  that  this  very  argu- 
ment is  pursued  at  great  length.  See 
part  ii.  of  that  work,  p.  194— 2G2. 

\)  British  Critic,  1839,  No.  52, 
p.  257.  Plenitudo  sacerdotii,  is  a  de- 
signation used  for  episcopacy  in  ancient 
writers. 


LECT.  v.]  THE    FORM    OF    ORDINATION    NECESSARY.  113 

vauntingly  declare  to  be  in  preservation  and  in  actual  posses- 
sion.' 

A  single  breach,  in  any  part,  of  any  one  course,  of  this  mys- 
terious chain  —  by  which  a  nervous  spiritual  energy  is  commu- 
nicated to  the  entire  body  —  will  at  once  destroy  its  vitality, 
and  reduce  its  ministers  to  laymen,  and  its  ordinances  to  mere 
nullities. 

A  second  test,  which  is  also  self-imposed,  and  which  will  be 
necessary  for  the  further  trial  of  the  genuineness  of  each  link  in 
this  golden  chain,  is  this  :  it  must  be  made  manifest,  in  regard 
to  all  the  individuals  in  this  long  line  of  personal  succession, 
that  their  ordination  as  prelates  was  valid  ;  first,  as  to  its  form ; 
secondly,  as  to  the  subject  of  it ;  and  thirdly,  as  to  its  ministers.* 

This  validity  must  be  ascertained,  first,  as  to  the  form  of  their 
ordination.  For,  "  any  episcopal  ordination"^  will  by  no  means 
be  a  sufficient  guaranty,  when,  by  a  mistake,  the  souls  which 
Christ  redeemed  may,  through  hesitation  "  or  mistake,  perish."* 
Numerous  have  been  the  cases  in  which  individuals  have  been 
forthwith  and  unconditionally  re-ordained,  when  any  doubt  has 
affected  the  "ministration  of  the  sacrament,"  —  to  use  prelatic 
language — in  its  own  original  form  ;  and  this,  "whether  the  doubt 
affected  the  whole  sacrament,  or  related  only  to  a  circumstance 
of  the  sacrament  already  administered."  "For  sacraments  are 
of  such  great  moment ;  especially  those  which  are  conferred 
but  once,  that  when  there  is  any  probable  doubt  that  they  have 
not  been  validly  received  or  delivered,  they  ought  certainly  to 
be  conferred  again."*  This  custom  continues  even  now,  as  may 
be  seen  from  many  striking  illustrations  of  it,  as  given  by  them- 
selves.^ The  "divine  grace  or  commission  is  believed,"  we 
are  informed,  "  to  be  only  given  perfectly,  to  those  lawfully 
ordained."''  Now  Bingham  teaches  us,  that  "  no  bishop  was 
to  be  elected  or  ordained  without  their  (metropolitans')  consent 
and  approbation  ;  otherwise,  the  canons  pronounce  both  the  elec- 
tion and  the  ordination  null,"^  No  bishop  was  to  be  ordained, 
until  the  canons  of  the  church  were  read  in  his  hearing.  All 
the  ancient  rituals,  and  pontificals,  and  canons,  "  require  the 
imposition  of  hands  to  be  given  by  the  consecrating  bishops, 
while  the  prayer  of  consecration   is  repeated.     "  It  might  be 

1)  See  Oxf.  Tr.  vol.  i.  pp.  377,  3)  Ibid,  p.  434. 

378.  and  see  references  in  Lecture  i.  4)  Morinus  de  Ordin,  in  Palmer, 

"  This  authority  is    traceable  in  our  ii.  p.  434. 

church  to  the   apostles,  and  through  5)  See  Palmer,  ibid,  p.  435. 

the   apostles   to   Christ."     Dr.    Boy-  6)  Palmer,  ii.  p.  441. 

ton's  Sermon,  p.  14.  7)   Bingham,  B.  ii.  ch.  xvi.  §  12. 

2)  Palmer  on  the  Ch.  vol.  ii.  436.  8)  Ibid",  B.  iv.  ch.  vi.  §  1. 

15 


114  THE    PROPEK    SUBJECTS    OF    OKDINAtlON.  [leCT.  V. 

argued,"  says  Mr.  Palmer,  "  that  this  is  necessary,  in  order  to 
determine  the  other  to  the  grace  of  the  episcopal  order.'"  It 
must  also  be  determined  beyond  doubt,  what  form  is  necessary 
to  a  valid  ordination  ;  for,  if  the  essence  of  "  this  sacrament  " 
consists  in  the  matter  and  form  now  assigned  by  the  Romish 
church,*  then  it  follows  that,  "  since  all  the  rituals  of  the  Latin 
church  —  for  the  first  ten  centuries — had  no  such  form,  .... 
the  church  had,  in  the  course  of  so  many  ages,  no  true  orders."^ 
These,  and  all  other  considerations,  of  whatever  nature  they 
may  be,  touching  the  form  in  which  a  valid  ordination  may  be 
conferred,  —  must  be  shown  to  be  all  fulfilled  in  reference  to 
each  individual  prelate,  in  the  endless  chain  of  apostolical  suc- 
cession. 

But,  secondly,  this  validity  must  be  further  manifested,  as  it 
regards  the  subjects  of  such  ordinations.  And  first,  we  demand 
that  above,  and  in  precedence  to,  all  other  requirements  on  this 
head,  those  laid  down  in  the  apostolic  canons  be  fully  and  an- 
swerably  met. 

The  qualifications  of  a  bishop  are  unequivocally  expressed 
by  the  apostle  Paul,  as  in  other  places,  so  very  fully  in  1  Tim. 
iii.  1 — 7,  and  Titus,  iv.  5 — 9.  Personal  piety ;  holiness  of 
character ;  a  thorough  and  correct  knowledge  of  the  truths  of 
the  gospel ;  and  ability  to  communicate  that  knowledge  to  oth- 
ers —  these,  among  other  specifications,  are  made  essential  to 
him  who  would  fitly  enter  upon  the  high  and  holy  office  of  a 
christian  bishop.  These  qualifications  are  what  God  himself  has 
made  necessary,  and  which  cannot,  therefore,  be  dispensed 
with  by  man.  They  are  not  such  as  are  desirable  merely,  but 
such  as  are  required — not  such  as  are  variable,  but  what 
are  permanently  necessary.  Without  these,  no  ecclesiastical 
authority  under  heaven,  could  induct  a  man  into  the  character, 
however  it  might  into  the  office,  of  a  minister  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment.'' Such  an  individual  might  be  officially,  externally,  and 
nominally,  a  bishop,  but  he  would  not  be  a  teacher  sent  of  God, 
or  called  by  him.  It  were  blasphemous  presumption  to  chal- 
lenge the  power  of  gifting  such  an  one,  by  the  mere  imposition 
of  a  prelate's  hands,  and  the  utterance  of  a  prelate's  prayer,  (and 
yet  this,  we  are  told,  is  the  essence  of  ordination,  though  it  is 
no  where  so  taught  in  the  word  of  God,)  with  the  plenitude  of 
sacerdotal  power  and  episcopal  grace.  A  bench  composed  of 
such  bishops,  were  a  most  graceless  episcopate  —  having  power 
to  sit  as  God  in  his  temple  —  to  subvert  his  counsels,  and  to  set 

1)  Palmer,  vol.  ii.  pp.  467,  468.  3)  Ibid,  do. 

2)  See   Bishop    Burnet  on   Art.  4)  See   Palmer,  vol.   ii.  p.   446, 
25th,  pp.  373  and  374.                                 and  p.  510. 


LECT.  v.]  THK    QUALIFICATIONS    OF    BISHOPS.  115 

at  naught  his  plainest  requirements.  They  who  knowingly 
ordain  such  characters ;  and  they  who  are,  in  such  unfitness, 
knowingly  ordained  —  are  traitors  to  God,  to  his  church,  and  to 
his  sacred  cause. 

In  their  declaration  of  the  functions  of  bishops  and  priests, 
the  English  reformers  declare,  in  full  conformity  with  these 
views,  that  *'  this  office,  he.  is  subject,  determined  and  re- 
strained unto  those  certain  limits  and  ends,  for  the  which  the 
same  was  appointed  by  God's  ordinance,"  he.  Again  :  "  by 
which  words,  (of  the  apostle,  in  the  passage  quoted  above,)  it 
appeareth  evidently,  not  only  that  St.  Paul  accounted  and  num- 
bered this  said  power  and  office  of  the  pastors  and  doctors, 
among  the  proper  and  special  gifts  of  the  Holy  Ghost ;  but  it 
also  appeareth  that  the  same  was  a  limited  power  and  office, 
ordained  especially,  and  only,  for  the  causes  and  purposes  be- 
fore rehearsed.'"  If,  then,  it  should  be  found  historically  true, 
that  such  graceless  and  unqualified  subjects  have  been  thrust 
into  the  office,  or  rather,  into  the  benefice  and  emoluments  of 
the  office  of  bishop  —  then  are  we  assured,  that  God  never  sent 
them,  and  that,  however  called  bishops,  they  were  yet  no 
bishops — and  consequently,  w^ere  absolutely  unfit  either  to  re- 
ceive, or  to  impart,  or  to  transmit,  this  spiritual  or  heavenly  gift.' 

But  when  we  pass  from  the  consideration  of  the  qualifica- 
tions of  the  proper  subjects  of  episcopal  ordination,  as  they  are 
laid  down  in  the  canon  of  inspiration,  to  these  same  qualifica- 
tions, as  laid  down  in  the  canons  of  councils,  and  in  the  common 
law  of  ecclesiastical  bodies ;  we  shall  find  that  the  tests  of  such 
validity  are  multiplied  and  not  decreased,  and  that  the  impossi- 
bility of  authenticating  the  genuineness  of  every  link,  in  this 
interminable  chain,  is  as  far  removed  from  practicability  as  in- 
finite is  from  finite. 

Bishops,  as  we  thus  learn,  were  not  to  be  ordained  under 
thirty  years  of  age,^  and  yet  we  know  they  were  often  ordained 
even  in  infancy.*     They  only  were  proper  subjects  for  ordina- 

1)  See  also  Art.  xxvi.  See  this  the  office  of  the  episcopate,  then  is 
in  Burnet's  Hist,  of  Reform.  Coll.  the  word  altogether  misapplied,  being 
of  Records,  B.  iii.  Art.  v.  withdrawn  from  its  spiritual  and  in- 

2)  We  do  not  say  that  God  can-  ternal  reference,  and  applied  to  tha 
not,  or  that  he  has  not  blessed  the  which  is  only  external.  And  if,  on 
ministration  of  unworthy  prelates  and  the  other  hand,  it  is  intended  to  refe 
teachers,  but  only  that  such  indieidu-  to  an  internal  spiritual  efficacy,  this 
ah  are  tkemsclres  unworthy,  and  as  plainly  is  neither  possessed  nor  corn- 
ministers,  invalid  in  the  sitrhtof  God,  municable  by  such  unholy  prelates, 
and  that  they  are  incapable,  by  any  3)  Bingham,  vol.  i.  pp.  103,  104. 
personal  merit  or  influence,  of  com-  4)  Ibid,  p.  106,  and  Calvin,  B.  iv. 
municating    any    spiritual    grace.     If  ch.  v.  §  I. 

by  the  episcopal  grace,  we  understand 


116 


THE  QUALIFICATIONS   OF   BISHOPS. 


[lect.  V 


lion,  who  had  gone  through  the  inferior  orders  ;i  and  yet  nothing 
was  more  common  than  for  individuals  to  be  thrust  into  the 
episcopate  at  once.^  The  book  of  the  gospels  was  to  be  laid 
upon  the  head  of  bishops  at  their  ordination,3  and  yet  have  there 
been  times,  when  such  a  book  could  not  be  obtained.  No  one 
was  to  be  ordained  a  bishop  while  under  sentence  of  deposition.* 
Inquiry  was  to  be  made  into  the  faith  and  morals  of  such  as  were 
ordained  ;^  ordination  was  not  to  be  given  to  strangers,8  —  nor 
to  persons  who  had  done  public  penance? —  nor  to  energumens 
or  demoniacs®  —  nor  to  murderers,  or  adulterers,  nor  to  any  that 
had  lapsed  in  time  of  persecutiong  —  nor  to  usurers  or  seditious 
persons'"  —  nor  to  such  as  had  dismembered  their  own  body, 
(as  Origen  did,)"  —  nor  to  such   as  were  baptized  with  clinic 


1)  "  When  Constantine,  (Presb. 
Letters,  pp.  233,  234,)  the  antipope, 
was  compelled  to  yield  the  apostolic 
chair  to  Stephen  III.,  in  768,  and  was 
dragged  before  a  council  in  the  lat- 
eran,  (his  eyes  having  been  mercifully 
torn  out,  that  he  might  be  exempted 
from  the  pain  of  seeing  his  successful 
competitor,)  he  was  sternly  asked, 
why  he,  a  layman,  had  dared,  in  defi- 
ance of  the  laws  of  the  church,  to  ac- 
cept ordination  as  a  bishop.  Constan- 
tine answered,  that  of  such  ordina- 
tions there  were  many  examples  in 
the  church;  of  which  he  mentioned, 
particularly,  the  cases  of  Sergius  of 
Ravenna,  and  Stephen  of  Naples,  who 
of  laymen  were  ordained  metropoli- 
tans, in  the  late  pontificate.  Jf  pain 
and  fear  had  not  confounded  his  recol- 
lection, he  might  have  mentioned 
many  more  instances  of  the  same 
gross  irregularity,  and  produced  a 
multiplicity  of  examples  of  men  who 
were  consecrated  high  priests,  without 
being  priests.  He  might  have  named 
Cyprian,  '  the  apostle  of  high-church,' 
who,  according  to  Pontius,  his  biogra- 
pher, was  only  what  was  called  a  ne- 
ophite,  or  one  newly  converted  and 
baptized,  when  he  was  elected  and 
ordained  bishop  of  Carthage  ;  and 
Nectarius,  whom  the  second  general 
council  appointed  to  succeed  Gregory 
Nazianzen,  in  the  see  of  Constantino- 
ple ;  and  Philogonius,  who  was,  with- 
out ceremony,  taken  from  the  bench, 
on  which  he  sat  as  a  lay-judge,  and 
placed  on  the  episcopal  throne  of  An- 
tioch  ;  nay,  and  as  great  a  saint  as 
any  of  them,  Ambrose  of  Milan,  who 
was  elected  bishop  before  he  was  bap- 
tized, and  ordained  a  few  days  after. 


No  person  who  is  conversant  with 
ecclesiastical  history,  needs  to  be  in- 
formed, that  after  the  time  of  Con- 
stantine (the  antipope)  such  trans- 
gressions of  the  canons  occurred  fre- 
quently. Some  of  them  were  shock- 
ingly flagrant." 

"  Pope  Alexander  II.  condemns  or- 
dination per  saltum,  that  is,  leaping 
to  a  superior  order  without  passing 
through  the  inferior."  Art.  Ordination, 
Rees'  Cyclop. 

Mr.  Percival  himself  allows  that 
there  "  are  many  instances  to  be  found 
in  church  history,  of  persons  conse- 
crated to  the  episcopate  Irom  the  laity." 
(On  Apost.  Sue.  Ap.  p.  110,  Eng.  ed.) 
Now,  Dr.  Field,  who  is  at  least  as 
good  authority  as  Mr.  Percival,  says  : 
"  A  bishop  ordained  per  saltvm,  (i.  e, 
that  never  had  the  ordination  of  a 
presbyter,)  can  neither  consecrate  and 
administer  the  sacrament  of  the  Lord's 
bodv,  nor  ordain  a  presbyter."  Of 
the  Church,  B.  3,  ch.  39,  p.  157,  fol.  ed. 
1635,  in  Powell,  p.  310. 

See  instances  of  those  introduced  to 
the  episcopate  immediately,  in  Plea 
for  Presb.  p.  19. 

2)  See  further.  Palmer,  vol.  ii.  p. 
432,  and  Bingham,  vol.  vi.  pp.  108  and 
109. 

3)  Palmer,  vol.  ii.  p.  121. 

4)  Bingham,  vol.  vi  p.  492. 

5)  Ibid,  vol.  i.  358. 

6)  Ibid,  vol.  i.  p.  360. 

7)  Bingham,  vol.  i.  361,  and  vol. 
vi.  p.  495. 

8)  Ibid,  vol.  vi.  p.  493,  and  vol.  i. 
p.  331. 

9)  Ibid,  vol.  i.  p  363. 

10)  Ibid,  p.  365. 

11)  Ibid,  vol.  i.  p.  366. 


LECT.  v.] 


THE  QUALIFICATIONS  OF  BISHOPS. 


117 


baptismi  —  nor  to  any  one  unbaptized,  or  not  baptized  in  due 
form*  —  nor  to  any  baptized,  or  even  re-baptized  by  heretics  or 
laymens — nor  to  any  who  had  not  first  made  all  their  family 
catholics'*  —  nor  to  soldiers,  actors,  and  numberless  other  descript 
and  nondescript  characters/ 


1)  Bingham,  vol.  i.  p.  309,  and 
Blair's  Waldenses,  vol.  i.  p.  40. 

2)  Bingham,  vol.  vi.  p.  493. 

3)  Ibid,  vol.  i.  p.  370,  &c  Fur- 
ther, in  the  reign  of  James  I.  the 
words  "  lawful  minister  were  in- 
serted in  the  rubric  for  private  bap- 
tism, to  prevent  laymen  from  pre- 
suming to  baptize."  Rymer,  vol.  xvi. 
p.  57.5,  in  Origin  of  the  Prayer  Book, 
p.  100. 

See  also  Lond.  Chr,  Obs.  for  1811, 
App.  p.  832. 

"  Baptism  (Presb.  Letters,  pp.  297, 
298)  ought  unquestionably  to  precede 
consecration.  So  thought  Cyprian, 
and  that '  great  and  respectable  coun- 
cil,' the  first  council  of  Nice,  and  the 
composers  of  the  apostolical  constitu- 
tions ;  in  a  word,  all  that  you  account 
respectable  in  christian  antiquity." 

"  Buttiie  most  terrible  consequence 
of  all  is,  that,  when  the  present  epis- 
copal clergy  of  Scotland  look  back 
to  their  spiritual  progenitors  of  the 
seventeenth  century,  tliey  can  discern 
nothing  but  a  number  of  pagans  dress- 
ed in  canonicals.  If  their  ancestors, 
after  the  flesh,  were  unbaptized  per- 
sons, as  all  presbyterians  are ;  (and 
I  am  much  misinformed,  if  several  of 
them  have  not  this  dreadful  retro- 
spect,) then  they  have  nothing  heredi- 
tary to  depend  on  for  their  admission 
into  heaven ;  but  must  be  obliged, 
like  those  who  call  themselves  '  cler- 
gy '  of  the  establishment,  to  trust  to 
'  repentance  toward  God,  and  faith 
towards  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.'  " 

"  Unless,"  says  Dr.  Mitchell,  ad- 
dressing the  non-juring  successor, 
Bishop  Skinner,  (Presb.  Letters,  p. 
223,)  "  you  liave  sacrificed  some  of 
your  distinguishing  principles  to  the 
treaty  of  friendship,  into  which  you 
have  lately  entered  with  that  church, 
you  must  maintain  that  baptism  by 
mid  wives,  or  any  of  the  laity,  male  or 
female,  is  not  valid,  and  that  it  leaves 
the  person  to  whom  it  is  administered, 
as  much  a  Jew  or  pagan  as  it  finds 
him." 

4)  Bingham,  vol.  i.  p.  371. 


5)  See  in  ibid,  vol.  i.  pp.  370,  392. 
But  further,  (Presbyterian  Letters, 
pp.  227,  228 :)  "  One  may  be  inca- 
pacitated by  one's  sex  as  well  as  by 
one's  age,  for  ordination  to  a  baptism  ; 
and  it  is  not  beyond  the  bounds  of 
rational  belief,  that  you  have  some  fe- 
male '  authors  and  predecessors  '  be- 
tween you  and  the  apostles.  It  is  a 
canon  of  the  New  Testament,  that 
women  shall  not  be  ordained  ecclesi- 
astics of  such  an  order,  as  entitles 
them  to  speak  in  the  churches.  Yet 
there  are  at  least  fifty  Latin  authors, 
including  Platina  and  some  Greeks, 
who  relate  that  a  lady,  most  of  them 
say  of  English  extraction,  of  the  name 
of  JoUana,  or  Joan,  did  slip,  somehow, 
into  the  chair  of  St.  Peter,  and  occu- 
pied it  till  she  was  brought  to  bed. 
What  effect  this  remarkable  event 
had,  during  the  two  years  five  months 
and  four  days  that  Joan  filled  the  pa- 
pal see,  on  the  stream  of  succession, 
in  so  far  as  the  validity  of  your  orders 
is  concerned,  I  do  not  know,  and  I 
presume  you  are  alike  ignorant.  For 
aught  any  body  now  alive  can  tell, 
the  crosier  may  have  descended  to  our 
Scottish  primers,  from  a  hand,  which 
Nature  and  the  New  Testament  ap- 
pointed to  hold  no  staff  but  the  distaff. 

"  I  am  perfectly  aware  of  the  fact, 
(that  Joan  succeeded  St.  Peter)  being 
disputed.  It  would  be  strange  if  it 
were  not,  in  the  church  of  Home, 
which  conceals,  or  denies,  or  expun- 
ges from  all  records,  under  her  con- 
trol, what  she  does  not  choose  to 
acknowledge. 

"  I  am  aware,  also,  that  some  prolest- 
ants  have  submitted  to  the  labor  of 
investigating  the  evidence,  on  which 
the  truth  of  this  curious  fact  rests,  and 
have  expressed  themselves  dissatis- 
fied with  it.  Yet  Fra  Paolo,  one  of 
the  most  learned  and  intelligent  Ro- 
man catholic  writers  of  his  own  or 
any  other  age,  acknowledges  that  it 
has  never  been  disproved,  and  nays, 
that  though  he  is  disposed  to  believe 
it  false,  it  is  not  on  account  of  its  ab- 
surdity, —  that  age,  (the  middle  of  the 


118 


THE    QUALIFICATIONS    OF    BISHOPS. 


[lect.  V. 


Those,  says  Palmer,  "are  manifestly  devoid  of  the  qualifi- 
cations required  by  the  apostles  and  the  church,"  who  have 
been  guilty  of  crime,  (see  specifications,)  who  are  illiterate, 
who  are  neophytes  —  that  is,  ordained  inmiediately  after  their 
baptism,  or  before  the  canonical  age,'  or  without  examination  — 
who  are  heretics,  excommunicate  and  schismatics  —  those  de- 
ficient in  mind  or  body —  those  under  the  command  of  others 
—  those  ordained  by  a  bishop  who  had  no  right,  or  whose 
ordination    was    in    any  degree    doubtful,'^   or    who    had    been 


ninth  century)  producing  thinga  as 
extraordinary  as  a  lady  being  pope." 
See  the  truth  of  this  history  of  the 
popess  Joan  proved  by  sixty-five  po- 
pish autliors,  several  Greek  authors, 
and  by  other  evidence, — and  all  objec- 
tions answered  —  in  "  The  History  of 
Popery,"  «fec.  by  the  authors  of  the 
Universal  History,  4to.  Lond.  1735, 
vol.  i.  pp.  299—303. 

1)  "  How  old,"  asks  Dr.  Mitchell 
(Pres.  Lett.  pp.  224, 2-25,)  "  was  Hugh, 
the  son  of  Count  Herbert,  when  his 
father  procured  his  exaltation  to  the 
archiepiscopal  see  of  Rheims  ?  Just 
five  years  of  age  ;  and  yet  iiis  election 
was  confirmed  by  the  infallible  Pope 
John.  If  Hugh  was  an  apostolic  bish- 
op, I  suppose  no  body  will  dispute  tiie 
legality  and  propriety  of  Caligula's 
appointment  of  his  favorite  horse  to 
the  consulship  at  Rome.  Whether 
the  venerable  Archbishop  Hugh  was 
ordained,  and  began  to  perform  his 
archiepiscopal  functions,  '  or  admin- 
ister the  blessings  of  the  holy  and  ven- 
erable sacraments,'  before  his  grace 
was  thought  by  madanie  la  countesse, 
his  mamma,  to  be  quite  fit  for  quitting 
the  nursery;  or  whether  the  pope,  de 
plenitudine  p'>testati.s,  permitted  his 
grace  to  enjoy  the  revenues  of  his  see 
in  the  nursery,  and  allowed  another, 
such  as  the  arch-priest  of  the  church 
of  Rheims,  to  perform  the  functions, 
in  quality  of  his  grace's  lieutenant; 
and  among  other  tlungs  to  ordain,  I 
will  not  positively  say."  "John  XT. 
the  bastard  of  a  former  pope,  was 
placed  in  the  chair  of  St.  Peter,  before 
he  was  twenty  years  of  age.  Benedict 
IX.  was  made  pope  at  the  age  of  eleven, 
according  to  some,  and  of  eighteen 
according   to  others." 

"  It  were  endless  to  mention,  by 
name,  all  the  striplings,  the  adolcscen- 
tuli,  as  Baronius  indignantly  calls 
them,  who  were,  at  different  periods 
of  the  Romish  hierarchy,  and  in  all 


the  western  nations  of  Europe,  thrust 
into  the  highest  seats  of  the  church. 
I  cannot,  however,  pass  over  two  in- 
stances, which  occurred  in  our  own 
country,  and  so  lately  as  the  beginning 
of  the  sixteenth  century.  The  duke 
of  Ross,  a  younger  brother  of  king 
James  IV.,  and  Alexander  Stuart, 
James'  natural  son,  were  successively 
nominated  to  the  archbishopric  of  St. 
Andrews,  the  former  before  he  was 
twenty,  the  latter  when  he  was  four- 
teen years  of  age." 

2)  The  author  of  the  Rights  of 
the  Chr.  Church,  (London,  1702,  edit. 
3d.,  p.  327,)  in  controverting  Mr.  Dod- 
well's  arguments,  remarks,  *'  whether 
the  papists  have  or  have  not  done  this, 
(neglected  to  continue  their  succes- 
sion) the  English  church,  by  his  own 
reasoning,  must  be  without  bishops, 
because  they  who  were  ordained  to 
sees  already  full,  are,  as  he  asserts  in 
at  least  forty  places,  no  bishops,  and 
their  consecrations  null  and  void  :  and 
'it  was,'  as  he  saith,  'a  principle 
universally  received  in  the  catholic 
church,  as  ancient  as  the  practice  of 
two  pretending  to  the  same  bishoprick, 
that  the  secundus  was  always  looked 
on  as  nuUusforas  alienus,  so  far  from 
being  a  bishop  of  the  church,  that  tlie 
attempt  divided  him  from  it.  And 
this  he  saith  is  as  evident  from  reason 
as  from  authority,  because  no  man 
can  convey  the  same  thing  twice  ;  and 
therefore,  in  all  monarchical  districts, 
none  can  suppose  an  anti-monarch's 
title  good,  till  he  has  shown  the  first 
monarch's  title  is  not  so.'  And  con- 
sequently, the  attempt  to  make  protes- 
tant  bishops  of  those  sees  which  were 
full  of  otliers,  must  be  null  and  void  ; 
and  if  they  were  no  bishops  of  ihose 
places  to  which  they  were  ordained, 
they  were  bishops  of  no  others,  and 
therefore  no  bishops  at  all ;  since  none, 
as  he  owns,  can  be  a  bishop  of  the 
catholic    church   otherwise    than  by 


LECT.  v.]  THE    QXrALIFICATIONS    OF   01tf)AINERS.  119 

deprived,  and  finally,  those  whose  wives  are  of  an  evil  char- 
acter.'" 

Such  are  some  of  the  tests,  by  which  each  link  in  this  "  un- 
broken line  from  Peter  to  the  present  day  "*  is  to  be  approved. 

But,  in  the  third  place,  we  must  consider  the  qualifications 
which  must  be  shown  to  have  existed  in  each  case  of  ordina- 
tion, in  the  ministers  or  ordainers. 

These  also  are  required,  by  the  canons  of  inspiration,  to  be 
faithful  men,  who  shall  be  able  to  teach  others,  also,  (2  Tim. 
ii.  2;  and  see  all  of  chap.  2nd  and  3d.)  Faithfulness  to  God,  to 
Christ,  "  to  the  truth  and  trust  of  the  gospel,"  —  to  the  glory 
of  God  and  the  salvation  of  men,  —  such  only  as  have  these  gifts 
are  scripturally  empowered  to  ordain  others. 

All  the  canons  required  that  ordination,  to  be  valid,  must  be 
performed  "  by  a  bishop,  whose  own  ordination  is  in  no  degree 
doubtful."^  Now,  according  to  these  canons,  all  bishops  should 
be  consecrated  by  their  metropolitan,  and  the  synod  of  compro- 
vincial bishops,'*  and  yet  by  this  single  test,  the  entire  succes- 
sion, both  in  the  English  and  Romish  churches,  is  completely 
vitiated." 

The  canons  are  equally  pointed  in  requiring,  in  order  to  any 
valid  ordination,  the  presence  of  at  least  three  prelates.^  All 
ordinations,  by  less  than  three  prelates,  are,  by  what  may  be 
termed,  in  church  phrase,  the  universal  consent  of  the  catholic 
church  —  for  this  alivays  supposes  a  difference  of  more  or  less 
extent  —  and  sometimes  an  opposition  on  the  part  even  of  the 
majority  —  invalid.'     Now,  by  this  canon,  also,  the  succession, 

being   a  bishop   of   some    particular  others  before  them,  till   they  come  to 

district.      Nor    could    the    death    of  the  apostles. 

the  popish    bishops    make  those  who  "  If    we    may   believe    Gregory  of 

were   not   so   much    as   members    of  Nyssa,  (Dr.  Mitchell's  Presb.  Letters, 

the  catholic  church,  to  become  bishops  p.   209,)    it   is   a  fact,  that    Gregory 

of  it."  Thaumaturgus  was  ordiiined,   not  by 

1)  See  Palmer,  vol.  ii.  pp.  437,  two  or  three  bishops  laying  their 
438,  and  pp.  436,  and  434,  and  429,  «&c.  hands   on    him,  but   by   Phedimus,  a 

2)  Dr.  Hook.  neighboring  bishop,  who,  at  the   time 

3)  Palmer,  vol.  ii.  p.  43^).  of  the  ordination,  happened  to  be  at 

4)  Ibid,  vol.  i.  p  487.  The  Ni-  the  distance  of  three  days'  journey 
cene  council  enacted  that  "  it  is  very  from  the  person  ordained.  Tlie  truth 
evident  and  certain,  that  if  any  one  be  is,  Phedimus  dedicated  Gregory  to  the 
made  a  bishop  without  the  concur-  service  of  God  at  Neocesarea,  by  his 
rence  of  the  metropolitan,  this  great  own  solitary  prayers,  in  the  absence 
council  has  decided  that  such  an  one  of  Gregory,  and  without  his  consent 
ought  not  to  be  a  bishop."  Cap.  7,  either  asked,  or  given  freely,  or  ex- 
in  Saravia,  p.  187.  torted  ;    and  yet    Gregory  undertook 

5)  See  Palmer,  vol.  i.  pp.  487,  the  charge  assigned  him,  without  fur- 
488.  ther  ceremony,  and  performed  all  the 

0)  Bellarmine  allows  that  a  law-  parts  of  the  episcopal  function." 
ful  bishop  must  be  (VVillet,  Syn.  Pap.  7)  See  this  fully  argued  in  Palmer, 

p.  80)  ordained  of  three  bishops  which  vol.  ii.  p.  422,  &c.,  and  Bingham,  vol. 

were  ordained  of  others,  and  they  of  i.  p.  1 J  7,  and  Dr.  Mason,  vol.  iii.  p.  68 


120  THE   QUALIFICATIONS    OF    ORDAINERS.  [lECT.  V. 

in  the  Romish  and  the  English  church,  and  in  the  Romish  church 
in  this  country  also,  has  been  most  certainly  and  palpably  de- 
stroyed,' and  clouded  with  "  a  very  serious  doubt  on  their  ordi- 
nations generally  ;  "*  "  a  doubt,  too,  which  no  after  measures 
could  possibly  remove  or  efface,"  "  since  a  true  and  valid  epis- 
copal vocation  is  not  merely  probable,  but  certain  and  un- 
doubted."^ 

All  the  bishops  present  at  an  ordination  are  also  required  to 
"  lay  on  their  hands  in  the  ordination  of  a  bishop."*  Bishops 
were  not  to  ordain  their  own  successors.^  They  were  to  read 
the  canons  of  the  church  to  every  one  at  his  ordination.*  They 
were  not  to  ordain  in  another's  diocese  without  consent.''  And 
the  hands  of  the  consecrating  bishops  were  to  be  imposed 
ivhile  the  prayer  of  consecration  was  repeated.* 

A  wrong  baptism,  ;ilso,  is  sufficient  to  vitiate  the  whole  future 
orders  received  subsequently  to  it,  so  that  the  whole  ordination 
of  a  church,  and  its  succession,  may  be  broken  by  one  single 
case  of  invalid  baptism,  since  it  is  plain,  that  "nihil  dat,  quod 
non  habet."  Now,  it  is  a  fact,  that  notwithstanding  these  canons, 
no  one  has  ever  been  refused  orders  because  not  prelatically 
baptized.® 

VVe  have  thus,  with  as  much  brevity  as  possible,  laid  down 
the  admitted  canons  or  rules  of  common  law,  by  which  judg- 
ment must  be  rendered  in  this  matter.  The  foundatiorj  of 
prelacy  in  "  the  sure  word  of  prophecy,"  from  which  we  are 
admonished  to  let  "  no  man  move  us,"  "  must  be  tried  so  as  by 
fire,"  by  each  of  the  canons  we  have  drawn  forth.  The  actual 
existence,  and  the  genuine  and  unadulterated  character  of  each 
separate  link  in  the  chain  of  personal  succession  from  Christ, 
through  his  apostles,  to  the  present  time,  must  next  be  ascer- 
tained as  by  an  experimentum  crucis,  by  the  application  of  all 
those  numerous  canons  we  have  adduced,  touching  the  form,  the 
subject,  and  the  ministers  of  ordination  as  to  each  individual. 
It  must  be  known,  that  he  was  himself  duly  qualified  for  ordina- 
tion,—  that  he  was  duly  invested  with  the  sacerdotal  power  in 
all  its  plenitude  of  grace,  and  that  he  received  his  investiture 
from  the  hands  of  those  who  were  each  of  them,  in  like  man- 
ner, and  in  all  respects,  in  a  condition  of  "certain  and  undoubt- 
ed "  fitness  to  communicate  "  a  valid  episcopal  vocation.'""  This 
task  must  be  undertaken  and  gone  through  with,  and  the  result 

1)  See  Palmer,  vol.  ii.  pp.  469,             7)  Bingham,  vol.    i.  pp.  83,  and 
470,471,472.  395. 

2)  Palmer,  ii.  p.  473.  8)  Palmer,  ii  p.  4G7. 

3)  Ibid,  ii.  p.  474.  9)  See  affirmed  in  Burnet  on  the 

4)  Bingham,  vol.  i.  p.  121.  39th  art.  in  art.  xxvi.  p.  388,  3e9. 

5)  Ibid,  p.  135.  10)  See  Lend.  Chr.  Obs.  1840,  p. 

6)  Ibid, pp.  391,392.  222. 


LECT.  v.] 


THE    PROOF    UTTERLY    IMPOSSIBLE. 


121 


brought  clearly  to  light,  by  a  direct  or  reverse  progress,  through 
every  link  in  the  catalogue  of  christian  bishops,  amounting,  as 
has  been  stated,  to  some  one  hundred  thousand.'  "  The  un- 
suppliable  defect  of  any  necessary  antecedent,  must  needs,"  as 
Chillingvvorth  remarks,  "  cause  a  nullity  of  all  those  conse- 
quences which  depend  upon  it.  In  fine,  to  know  any  one 
thing,  you  must  first  know  ten  thousand  others,  whereof  not  any 

one  is  a  thing  that  can  be  known But  then,  that  of  ten 

thousand  probables,  no  one  should  be  false  ;  that  of  ten  thou- 
sand requisites,  whereof  any  one  may  fail,  not  one  should  be 
wanting ;  this  to  me  is  extremely  improbable,  even  cousin-ger- 

inan  to  impossible It  is,"  therefore,  "  not  a  thing  very 

improbable,  that  amongst  those  many  millions,  which  make  up 
the  Roman  "  (and,  we  may  add,  the  English)  "  hierarchy,  there 
are  not  twenty  true.'" 


1)  Since,  a  priori,  we  do  not 
know  but  what  this  succession  has 
been  brolien,  by  one  or  many  invalid 
links,  it  is  no  more  than  reasonable  to 
require,  as  has  been  said  by  a  very 
able  writer,  "  that  there  should  be 
very  strong  evidence  indeed  that  the 
strictest  regularity  was  observed  in 
every  generation  ;  and  that  episcopal 
functions  were  exercised  by  none  not 
bishops  by  succession  from  the  apos- 
tles."* 

That  the  ordination  in  the  Romish 
church  has  not  been  validly  perpetu- 
ated, see  shown  in  Dr.  Willet's  Syn. 
Pap.  pp.  81,82. 

"  Whereas,"  says  Dr.  Field,  (lib. 
3,  cap.  39,  in  Div.  Right  of  the  Min. 
Part  ii.  p  143.)  "  the  fathers  make  all 
such  ordinations  void  as  are  made  by 
presbyters,  it  is  to  be  understood  ac- 
cording to  the  strictness  of  the  canon 
in  use  in  their  times,  and  not  absolute- 
ly in  the  nature  of  the  thing  ;  which 
appears,  in  that  they  likewise  make 
all  ordinations  sine  tif.ulo  to  be  void  ; 
all  ordinations  of  bishops  ordained  by 
fewer  than  three  bishops  with  the  me- 
tropolitane;  all  ordinations  of  presby- 
ters by  bishops  out  of  their  own 
churches  without  leave.  Whereas  I 
am  well  assured,  the  Romanists  will 
not  pronounce  any  of  these  to  be 
void,  though  the  parties  so  doing  are 
not  excusable  from  all  fault."  Thus 
far  Dr.  Field. 

2)  See  his  entire  and  most  con- 

*  Review  in  the  Edinb.  Rev.  for  April,  1839, 
supposed  to  bo  written  by  Mr.  Macauley,  wlio 
is  himself  an  "piscopalian. 

16 


elusive  argumentum  ad  hoviinem, 
and  reduciio  ad  absurdum,  in  Works, 
vol.  i.  pp.  245 — 247,  and  again  at  p. 
281.  "  To  ascertain,"  says  Archbishop 
Whateley,  (Dang,  to  Christ.  Faith,  p. 
180,)  "  their  apostolical  succession  for 
eighteen  centuries,  you  must  examine 
all  the  decisions  of  general  councils, 
having  first  settled  the  claims  of  each 
to  divine  authority ;  you  must  consult 
the  works  of  all  the  ancient  fathers, 
observing  what  are  the  points  wherein 
they  agree,  and  which  of  these  are 
essential  points  ;  and  this,  after  having 
first  ascertained  the  orthodoxy  of 
each,  and  decided  on  the  degree  of 
weight  due  to  his  opinion ;  and  for 
this  purpose,  you  must  ascertain  also 
the  characters  and  qualifications  of 
those  modern  divines  who  have  un- 
dertaken to  select,  translate,  and  com- 
ment upon,  some  thirty  or  forty,  of 
those  voluminous  writers.  To  re- 
quire all  this,  of  the  great  body  of 
plain,  ordinary  christians,  who,  by 
supposition,  have  not  sufficient  learn- 
ing, or  ablity  to  judge  for  themselves 
of  the  true  sense  of  scripture,  would 
be  an  absurdity  too  gross  to  be  seri- 
ously intended  by  any  one.  If  we 
were  to  tell  a  plain,  unscientific  man, 
ignorant  of  astronomy,  and  destitute 
of  telescopes,  that  he  must  regulate 
his  hours,  not  by  the  town-clock,  but 
by  the  satellites  of  Jupiter,  from  ob- 
servations and  calculations  of  their 
eclipses,  no  one  could  be  made  to  be- 
lieve that  we  were  speaking  seri- 
ously." 

See  the  nature  of  our  demands  and 


122  THE    GROUND    OF    OUR    CONFIDENCE.  [lECT.  V. 

Now,  if  these  things  be  so  —  and  these  requisites  are  indeed 
necessary  —  and  this  personal  succession,  of  validly  ordained  pre- 
lates, is  needful  to  the  certain  present  enjoyment  of  those  heavenly 
gifts  on  which  salvation  depends,  —  then  most  truly  are  we 
thrown  upon  a  contingency,  as  hopeless  as  absolute  impossibil- 
ity can  make  it ;  since  it  is  very  sure  that  there  is  not,  on  these 
principles,  and  when  brought  to  these  tests,  a  single  prelate  in 
existence,  either  according  to  divine  or  ecclesiastical  right/ 

The  jeoparding  of  the  present  character  and  vitality  of  the 
church  upon  these  conditions,  is  nothing  less  than  to  evacuate 
the  very  being  of  a  church  at  all.'^  There  is  not  the  shadow 
of  a  shade,  upon  which  its  fabric  can  be  thus  made  to  rest. 
This  whole  boasted  claim  "  is  a  mere  assumption,  a  baseless 
theory  "^ —  and  only  involves  in  its  own  ruin  its  presumptuous 
authors.*  We  bless  God,  that  this  wild  hypothesis  rests  not 
upon  a  single  text  in  his  entire  word,  —  that  he  never  staked 
the  salvation  of  millions  of  unborn  souls  upon  a  contingency  like 
this,^  —  and  that  even  were  this  chain  of  personal  ministerial 
succession  shivered  into  atoms  ;  we  can  still  rejoice  in  the  suc- 
cession of  God's  word  in  its  purity  —  of  his  ordinances  in  their 
sanctity  —  of  his  gifts  in  their  plenitude  —  of  his  graces  in  all 
their  fulness  —  of  his  church  in  all  its  glory  —  and  of  his  Spir- 
it in  all  the  blessings  of  his  divine  and  enriching  presence. 

We  may  be  anathematized  and  stand  excommunicate  from  the 
Roman  or  the  Anglican  churches,  but  we  are  not  thereby,  God 
be  thanked,  aliens  from  the  body  of  Christ,  which  is  His 
church.  We  may  not  belong  to  the  church  prelatical,  but  we 
may  nevertheless  —  and  oh,  this  is  far  better  !  —  we  may  be  liv- 
ing members  of  the  church  spiritual.  We  say,  with  the  an- 
cient Albigenses,  when  thus  treated  by  the  Romish  hierarchy, 
"  we  are  christians,  you  are  episcopalians."®  We,  my  brethren, 
are  not  Anglican,  not  Roman,  not  protestant  episcopalian, — 
we  take  "  christian  for  our  name,"  and  presbyterian  "  for  our 
surname."  We  belong  to  no  sect  or  party,  —  we  tie  our  faith 
to  no  fathers,  councils,  or  authorities.     We  hazard  our  salva- 

the   impossibility  of  their  fulfilment,  4)  See  this  proved  by  Dr.  Barrow 

laid  down  by  Dr.  Rice  in  his  Review  on  Supremacy  of  the  Pope,  Suppos. 

of  Bishop  Ravenscroft,  in  the  Evang.  7th. 

and  Lit.  Mag.  vol.  ix.  pp.  550,  451.  5)  If  this  apostolic  succession  is 

See  also  Note  B.  the  only  ground  of  true  and  heavenly 

1)  See  Calvin  Instit.  B.  iv.  oh.  v.  grace,  then  must  every  behever,  in 
§  3.  order  to  have  true  peace  of  mind,  as- 

2)  See  Burnet  on  the  39th  art.  p.  certain  for  himself  the  validity  of  the 
338.  See  also  Bishop  Hoadley  in  Presb.  claims  of  their  respective  ministers. 
Def  p.  40.  6)  See  Faber,  on  pp.  89,  92, 101, 

3)  Palmer,  vol.   ii.  p.  518,   and  93. 
see  p.  526. 


LECT.  v.]       THE  GROUND  OF  OUR  CONFIDENCE.  123 

tion,  and  the  salvation  of  our  children,  upon  no  "  fabulous  and 
endless  genealogies  and  questions,  which  are  not  of  goodly  edi- 
fying. We  have  too  much  to  do  with  realities,  to  be  drawn 
aside  by  shadows.'"  We  rest  our  claim  to  the  attention  and 
regard  we  expect  from  our  people,  not  upon  our  proving 
that  all  other  denominations  are  churchless,  Christless,  and 
graceless  —  nor  upon  long-drawn  catena  of  misquoted  and 
misrepresented  fathers — but,  upon  our  manifestation  to  the 
consciences  of  them  that  hear  us,  of  the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus  — 
upon  our  exhibition  of  apostolic  doctrine  and  apostolic  practice — 
and  upon  our  zealous  efforts  to  impart  to  them,  as  instruments 
in  God's  hands,  all  spiritual  gifts.  These  are  the  seals  of  our 
ministry,  and  these  the  evidences  of  our  divine  mission.  God 
has  not  left  us,  brethren  in  the  Lord,  without  authority,  nor  can 
any  human  anathema  silence  his  voice,  or  prevent  the  outgo- 
ings of  his  gracious  Spirit,  in  raising  up,  qualifying,  and  sending 
forth  many  laborers  into  the  harvest  of  the  ministry. 

1)  This  is  the  language  of  the     this  theory.  Charge,  edition  1838,  see 
bishop  of  Chester,  as  applicable   to     page  3. 


ADDITIONAL  NOTES  TO   LECTURE  FIFTH. 


NOTE  A. 

The  following  able  remarks  are  from  the  Labyrinth,  or  Popish  Circle,  by 
Episcopius.  ("Taken  from  the  Southern  Christ.  Advocate,  March,  1841.) 
The  controversy  respecting  the  succession  is  useless  and  endless. 
Antk^uity  and  Succession  is  the  endless  burden  of  the  papal  song,  and  yet 
this  is  worthy  of  the  highest  admiration,  that  the  principal  declainiers  on  this 
topic  are  those  who,  perchance,  never  thoroughly  examined  the  books  and  his- 
tories of  the  men  from  whom  that  antiquity  and  continued  succession  must  be 
drawn  and  supported;  —  Or,  if  they  liave  examined  them,  they  are  by  no 
means  fit  persons  to  investigate  tliem  witliout  affection  or  prejudice,  since 
they  are  accustomed  either  foolishly  to  believe  by  means  of  some  proxy,  who 
in  their  estimation  is  most  intimately  acquainted  with  the  matter,  although 
such  person  is  not  unfrequently  destitute  of  all  correct  knowledge  of  things  : 
—  or,  without  sense  or  judgment  they  eagerly  catch  at  every  word  or  syllable 
which  they  imagine  may  be  rendered  at  all  subservient  to  their  purpose. 

How  irksome  it  must  be  to  descend  into  the  arena  of  disj)utation  with  such 
persons,  every  one  will  perceive.  For  who  does  not  see  the  great  labor  that 
is  required  to  determine  questions  which  are  to  be  demonstrated  from  the 
memory  of  past  ages,  from  various  books  and  histories,  and  which,  even  when 
established  by  solid  reasons,  so  as  to  close  the  door  to  all  future  exceptions, 
shall  still  fail  to  produce  any  good  effect  in  the  miuds  of  the  opposite  party  ! 

Wherefore  they  who  inculcate  upon  the  body  of  the  people,  such  matters  as 
these,  do  nothing  but  involve  them  in  an  inextricable  maze,  out  of  which  the 
unskilful  multitude  either  despair  of  a  happy  exit,  or,  if  they  have  any  hope, 
remain  still  in  the  same  uncertainty,  being  fatigued  and  confused  by  the  too 
difficult  labor  of  investigation.  It  is  impossible  for  any  other  result  to  follow  : 
and  this,  indeed,  is  the  most  ready  and  effectual  way  of  acquiring  power  to 
lord  it  over  the  consciences  of  simple  people,  and  having  bound  them  in  a 
gordian  knot,  to  persuade  them  to  the  belief  of  any  thing.  But  let  us  put 
both  these  things  in  a  little  clearer  light.  I  establish  the  first  by  the  following 
arguments  :  — 

No  man  is  able  to  deny  that  for  the  asserting  of  the  antiquity  not  only  of  the 
church,  but  likevi'ise  of  a  continued  and  uninterrupted  succession  of  bishops  in 
the  church,  it  is  necessarily  required  (1.)  a  certain,  undoubted,  and  accurate 
knowledge  both  of  Latin  and  Greek  authors,  and  of  all  the  histories  which 
have  been  written  on  the  subject ;  and  (2.)  that  to  this  knowledge  ought  to  be 
added  a  sound  and  acute  judgment,  by  which  the  examiner  may  discern  with 
exactness,  in  their  pages,  the  genuine  from  the  spurious  and  adulterated  books, 
true  histories  from  interpolated  ones,  and  those  which  have  been  fabricated  by 
party  feelings,  passion,  and  preconceived  opinions,  from  those  which  have  been 
composed  by  persons  who  had  no  such  undue  bias  or  prejudice  :  so  that  he 
may  reconcile  contrary  statements,  and  faithfully  supply  defects.  Every  one 
must  at  once  perceive  what  labor,  time,  and  anxiety  this  would  require.  Even 
among  the  most  learned,  during  the  entire  space  of  1800  years,  not  one  has 
hitherto  been  found,  who  was  adequate  to  this  weighty  performance.  Are  the 
uneducated  and  unskilful  common  people,  then,  who  are  considered  by  the 
papists  to  be  unqualified  for  the  examination  of  any  one  of  the  books  of  the 
holy  scriptures,  sufficient  to  undertake  and  go  through  this  great  work  ;  — 
accurately  to  search  all  those  volumes  of  ecclesiastical  history  with  which 
whole  barns  migiit  be  filled  and  whole  ships  laden  ?  The  laity  therefore  in  the 
Romish  church,  who,  laying  aside  the  holy  scriptures,  never  cease  to  prattle 


NOTES    TO    LECTURE    V.  125 

about  antiquity,  and  continued  succession,  betray  a  mind  sufficiently  stupid 
and  foolish  because  they  know  nothing  more,  perhaps  much  less,  about  true 
antiquity  and  succession,  than  about  the  holy  scriptures  j  or  rather  they  are 
alike  ignorant  of  both. 

It  is  true,  indeed,  that  a  catalogue  and  index  of  bishops  may  be  easily  com- 
posed, in  which  the  series  and  order  in  which  they  succeeded  each  other  may 
be  exhibited.  But  that  is  nothing  to  the  purpose  ;  for  the  Greek  church,  the 
Ethiopic,  and  others,  have  composed  such  catalogues  in  favor  of  their  several 
pretensions. — "The  church  of  Constantinople  has  one,"  says  Bellarmine, 
"from  the  time  of  the  emperor  Constantine,  in  an  uninterrupted  series,  and 
Nicephorus  likewise  deduces  the  names  of  all  the  bishops,  even  from  the  time 
when  the  apostle  Andrew  flourished."  Yet  Bellarmine,  and  with  him  all 
papists,  deny  that  the  Greeks  can  of  right  claim  to  themselves  a  proper  suc- 
cession. A  succession  of  persons,  therefore,  is  not  deemed  to  be  sufficient; 
but  an  additional  requisite  is,  that  it  should  be  a  legitimate  succession,  and 
such  a  one,  that  there  shall  not  be  found,  in  the  line  of  the  successive  bishops, 
a  single  heretic,  atheist,  or  apostate. 

] .  It  is  required,  that  it  be  legitimate  ;  for,  as  the  papal  decree  has  it,  (Dist. 
79.)  "  if  any  one  shall  be  enthroned  in  the  apostolic  see,  by  bribes,  by  human 
favor,  or  by  popular  or  military  tumult,  without  the  unanimous  and  canonical 
election  both  of  the  cardinals  and  of  the  inferior  clergy,  let  him  not  be  account- 
ed a  successor  of  the  apostles,  but  of  the  apostates.' '  2.  It  is  required  that  there 
shall  be  no  heretic  in  the  succession  of  bishops  ;  for  it  is  on  this  account,  as 
cardinal  Bellarmine,  and  other  popish  doctors  affirm,  that  the  succession  of 
the  Constantinopolitan  bishops  (those  of  the  Greek  church)  is  not  to  be 
esteemed  legitimate,  because  there  have  been  heretics  in  the  number.  (Liv. 
iv.  De  nolis  Ecclesiae,  chap.  8.)  If  therefore  any  one  wishes  to  form  a  correct 
judgment  of  the  succession  of  the  bishops  of  Rome,  according  to  the  canons  of 
the  Papists  themselves,  he  must  ascertain  both  these  points  with  the  greatest 
certainty. 

But  how  is  this  possible  .''  Who  can  know,  without  a  shadow  of  doubt, 
whether  all  her  bishops  obtained  the  episcopate  lawfully  ?  Did  those  of  them 
who  gained  their  dignity  in  the  succession  by  simony,  that  is  by  money  and 
gifts,  (as  Simon  Magus  wished  to  do,)  or  by  force,  intrigues,  factions  and  bri- 
bery ?  But  further,  if  any  person  desirous  of  becoming  acquainted  with  their 
history,  shall  discover  that  even  the  writers  most  devoted  to  the  claims  of  the 
church  of  Rome  frankly  confess,  not  only  that  one  or  two,  but  that  many  dif- 
ferent bishops  of  Rome  attained  to  the  pontifical  dignity,  who  were  convicted 
of  open  heresy,  and  accounted  (by  these  chief  writers  of  their  own  church) 
impious  scoundrels,  atheists,  schismatics,  ruffians,  and  debauchees,  who  by 
gifts  and  bribes,  by  force  and  factious,  without  any  previous  choice,  or  subse- 
quent approbation  on  the  part  of  the  clergy,  intruded  themselves  into  the  suc- 
cession by  foul  machinations  and  dishonest  stratagems,  by  deceit,  and  by  the 
influence  of  their  harlots,  and  kept  mistresses,  —  what  diligent  inquirer,  1  ask, 
can  extricate  himself  from  that  maze  of  perplexities  in  which  a  knowledge  of 
these  circumstances  will  have  involved  him.''  If  you  say,  "  Credence  in  this 
matter  is  to  be  given  to  the  best  and  to  the  most  faithful  historians,"  you  fall 
into  a  new  labyrinth  :  for  I  ask,  who  are  those  historians,  and  by  what  are  they 
to  be  distinguished  .'  Why  should  any  one,  by  such  a  remark,  derogate  from 
the  credit  of  the  popish  writers  ?  For  they  cannot  be  deemed  heretics,  or  hos- 
tile to  the  church  of  Rome,  who  were  most  subservient  to  it ;  and  some  of  these 
writers  were  the  greatest  flatterers  of  the  popes,  and  the  most  zealous  abettors 
of  the  papal  dignity.  The  papist  must  therefore  allow,  that  writers  of  this 
character  must  have  been  constrained  by  the  undoubted  and  known  truth  of 
the  thing  itself,  to  admit  these  facts  into  their  writings.  And  suppose,  for  the 
sake  of  argument,  that  they  who  have  recorded  these  corruptions  had  not  been 
writers  devoted  to  the  papacy,  what  just  reason  can  be  given,  why  they  should 
not  be  entitled,  as  faithful  writers,  to  equal  credit  with  the  advocates  of  the 
pope,  and  of  his  assumptions  .''  Friendship  is  as  powerful  as  enmity,  to  pre- 
vent an  author  from  recording  the  truth.  He  wlio  would  write  a  faithful  his- 
tory for  future  ages,  ought  to  be  free  from  all  bias ;  but  by  what  reason  can 
we  persuade  ourselves,  and  convince  our  own  mind,  that  there  has  ever  been 
any  such  writer,  especially  if  we  live  not  in  the  same  ago  with  him  .-'     lu  this 


126  NOTES   TO    LECTURE   V. 

case,  liowever,  the  testimony  against  the  integrity  of  the  succession  of  the 
Roman  bishops,  is  given  by  writers  whose  prejudices  were  ail  in  favor  of  the 
papacy. 

He  who  divests  himself  of  preconceived  opinions,  and  who  considers  these 
things  without  prejudice,  will  clearly  see  that  those  who  endeavor  to  shelter 
themselves  under  the  plea  of  antiquity  and  succession,  involve  themselves  in  a 
labyrinth  in  which  they  are  easily  entangled,  from  which  it  is  scarcely  possi- 
ble for  them  to  be  freed." 

Very  pertinent  also  are  the  remarks  of  Bishop  Hoadley.  (Preservative,  p. 
75,  &c.)  "  1  do  not  love,  I  confess,  so  much  as  to  repeat  the  principal  branch- 
es of  their  beloved  scheme  ;  they  are  so  different,  whencesoever  they  come, 
from  the  voice  of  the  gospel.  When  they  would  claim  you,  as  their  fellow- 
laborers  the  papists  do,  b}'  telling  you  that  you  cannot  hope  for  tlie  favor  of 
God,  but  in  the  strictest  communion  with  their  church,  (which  is  the  true 
Church  of  England,  governed  by  bishops  in  a  regular  succession,)  —  that  God 
hath  himself  hung  your  salvation  upon  this  nicety  ;  —  that  he  dispenses  none 
of  his  favors  or  graces,  but  by  the  hands  of  them  and  their  subordinate  priests  ; 
—  that  you  cannot  be  authoritatively  blessed  or  released  from  your  sins,  but 
by  them  who  are  the  regular  priests ;  —  that  churches  under  other  bishops, 
(i.  e.  other  than  in  a  regular  succession,)  are  sehismatical  conventicles,  made 
up  of  excommunicated  persons,  both  clergy  and  laity  ;  out  of  God's  church,  as 
well  as  out  of  his  favor  :  —  1  say,  when  such  arguments  as  these  are  urged  ; 
you  need  only  have  recourse  to  a  general  ansvi'er,  to  this  whole  heap  of  scandal 
and  defamation,  upon  the  will  of  God,  the  gospel  of  Christ,  and  the  Church 
of  England  in  particular  :  — that  you  have  not  so  learned  Christ,  or  the  design 
of  his  gospel,  or  even  the  foundation  of  this  particular  part  of  his  church, 
reformed  and  established  in  England.  The  following  arguments  will  justify 
you,  which  therefore  ought  to  be  frequently  in  the  thoughts  of  all,  who  have 
any  value  for  the  most  important  points.  God  is  just,  and  equal,  and  good  : 
and  as  sure  as  he  is  so,  he  cannot  put  the  salvation  and  happiness  of  any  man, 
upon  what  he  himself  has  put  it  out  of  the  power  of  any  man  upon  earth,  to 
be  entirely  satisfied  in.  —  It  hath  not  pleased  God,  in  his  providence,  to  keep 
up  any  proof  of  the  least  probability,  or  moral  possibility,  of  a  regular  uninter- 
rupted succession.  But  there  is  a  great  appearance,  and,  humanly  speaking, 
a  certainty  of  the  contrary,  that  this  succession  hath  been  interrupted." 

NOTE  B. 

There  is  still  another  source  of  uncertainty,  to  which  we  may  here  allude. 
According  to  Maimbourg,  the  Jesuit,  (Hist,  du  Grand  Schisme,  D'Occident, 
in  Bait.  Lit.  and  Rel.  Mag.  Ap.  1840,  p.  14G,)  there  have  been  about  thirty- 
one  established  methods  by  which  to  make  the  popes  the  visible  heads  of  the 
church.  It  appears  that  the  election  was  made  for  the  first  five  centuries  by 
the  clergy  and  the  consent  of  the  people — that  the  Arian  King,  Theodoric, 
usurped  the  right  to  create  the  pope  himself,  which  example  was  imitated  by 
the  Gothic  kings  who  followed  him,  —  that  this  right  was  retained  by  Justin- 
ian, and  afterwards  regained  by  the  tyranny  of  the  marquis  of  Etruria  and  the 
counts  of  Tuscany,  who  created  and  deposed  popes  at  their  pleasure,  instru- 
ments of  their  passions  —  and  that  for  some  centuries  this  power  having  been 
obtained  by  the  cardinals,  is  still  retained  by  them.  Most  certain  it  is,  then, 
that  either  this  office  is  of  divine  right,  and  then  the  mode  of  its  transmitted 
inheritance  must  be  equally  of  divine  appointment,  in  which  case  it  cannot  be 
pretended  that  any  valid  or  proper  succession  has  been  preserved,  unless  there 
are  some  thirty-one  modes  of  such  succession  laid  down  in  the  word  of  God ; 
for  Maimbourg  himself  asserts  that  in  the  great  Schism  whose  history  he 
writes,  "  it  was  morally  impossible  to  decide  who  were  true  popes,  and  who 
anti-popes  ;" — or  this  office  is  not  divine,  but  an  usurpation  and  a  despotism, 
and  in  this  case  it  is  equally  a  matter  of  indifference  whether  there  have  been 
thirty,  or  thirty  thousand  ways  by  which  its  retainers  have  gained  possession 
of  the  papal  chair.  Most  true  it  is,  that  if  its  present  incumbents  are  validly 
elected  and  introduced,  and  therefore  true  successors  for  eleven  centuries  af- 
ter Christ,  no  true  pope  could  have  occupied  the  see  of  Rome.  See  also 
Father  Paul's  Treatise  on  Benefices  and  Revenues.     Westminst.  1727,  p.  26. 


LECTURE   VI. 


THE   PEELATICAL    DOCTRINE    OF  APOSTOLICAL     SDCCESSION    TESTED     BY 

SCRIPTURE, 

The  claims  which  are  involved  in  the  doctrine  of  the  apostol- 
ical descent,  as  maintained  by  ??mnyof  its  advocates,  are  not  less 
arbitrary  and  despotic  ;  not  less  exclusive  of  the  just  rights  and 
privileges  of  other  sovereignties ;  nor  less  regardless  of  their 
interest  and  happiness;  than  were  those  of  the  Babylonian 
despot.  This  doctrine  being  supposed  true,  there  is  but  one 
church  on  earth,  and  that  is  the  prelatic  —  there  is  but  one 
order  of  ministry,  and  that  is  the  succession  of  prelates  —  there 
is  but  one  channel  of  efficacious  grace,  and  that  flows  between 
the  high  embankments  of  prelacy  —  and  there  is  but  one  cove- 
nanted gift  of  plenary  mercy,  and  that  is  deposited  in  the  hands 
of  prelates. 

This  doctrine,  in  all  its  nakedness,  and  boldness,  is  proclaimed, 
as  the  fundamental  principle  of  all  church  claims  whatsoever,  by 
the  doctors  of  the  Vatican  and  the  Sorbonne ;  by  the  doctors  of 
Maynooth,  and  the  doctors  of  Oxford ;  by  the  Roman  and  the 
Anglican  church.  "  It  is  the  mystic  pasan  of  sacerdotal  power 
and  glory." 

Nor  is  this  doctrine,  at  least  in  those  essential  elements,  which 
drag  with  them,  by  necessary  consequence,  the  whole  train  of 
awful  and  soul-shuddering  consequences,  received  merely  by 
those  who  are  denominated  high-churchmen,  and  who  love  and 
admire  the  church  with  an  almost  idolatrous  attachment;  but  it 
is  also,  as  would  appear,  avowed  by  many  of  those  who  are  dis- 
tinguished as  evangelical,  or  low-church  episcopalians. 


128 


THE    THEORY    ADOPTED    BY    LOW-CHURCHMEN.  [lECT.  VI. 


"  Few  episcopal  readers  of  the  tracts,"  (I  quote  from  the  Epis- 
copal Recorder  of  Philadelphia,  May  9,  1840,  the  organ  of  the 
low-church,  or  evangelic  episcopalians)*  can  hesitate  to  approve 


1)  The  Rev.  John  A.  Clark,  one 
of  the  editors  of  this  paper,  in  his 
"  Letters  on  the  Church,"  and  which 
are  generally  very  unexceptionable  in 
their  spirit  and  language,  nevertheless 
declares,  "  To  my  mind,  this  question 
assumes  a  vast  importance  from  a 
deep-rooted  conviction,  not  only  that 

OURS       is       VERILY     THE      CHDRCH     of 

Christ,  but,"   &c. 

"  That  the  evangelical  clergy,"  says 
R.  M.  Beverley,  Esq.,  (Heresy  of  Hu- 
man Priesthood,  London,  1839,  p.  81, 
Note,)  "  are  by  their  position  continu- 
ally in  danger  of  lapsing  into  the  vor- 
tex of  Puseyism,  is  apparent  in  their 
writings.  '  I  wrote  to  remind  you, 
good  proteslants,'  says  the  author  of 
the  Velvet  Cushion, '  that  you  owe  to 
popery  almost  every  thing  that  de- 
serves to  be  called  by  the  name  of 
a  church.'  (p.  17.)  And  of  the  O.xford 
Tracts,  Mr.  Bickersteth  says,  '  It  is 
true  1  strongly  deprecate  many  of 
their  statements  and  views  as  errone- 
ous in  themselves,  and  leading  to  still 
more  dangerous  errors.  But  there  is 
too  much  seriousness,  conscientious- 
ness and  impartial  truth  mingled  with 
those  views,  for  me  ever  to  have 
expressed  the  utmost  abhorrence 
against  them."  (Letter  in  the  Record, 
April  4,  1839.) 

"  That  against  this  abomination  of 
desolation,  set  up  in  the  holy  place, 
scarcely  an  evangelical  voice,  minis- 
tering at  the  altar,  has  been  heard 
long  and  loudly  to  protest,"  says  ihe 
London  Evangelical  Magazine,  "  that 
the  press  has  not  teemed  with  the  ex- 
posure and  reprobation  of  this  old  her- 
esy of  Rome,  so  daringly  paraded  in 
the  halls  and  the  sanctuaries  of  the 
protestant  reformation,  has  been  to 
us  a  matter  of  astonishment.  Has 
apostolical  succession  so  blinded  their 
understanding,  that  the  successors  of 
the  Venns,  the  Cecils,  and  the  New- 
tons,  can  thus  suffer  the  glory  of  their 
ministry  to  depart  without  warning  or 
remonstrance  ?  Have  tlie  senseless 
pride  and  folly  of  sacerdotal  power,  by 
which  babes  are  converted  into  be- 
lievers, and  scoffers  and  infidels  are 
sent  straight  to  heaven,  taken  such 
possession  of  their  hearts,  that  for  the 
sake  of  being  Anglican  priests,  they 
can  cease  to   be  evangelical  divines  ? 


Be  it  so  ;  while  we  deeply  lament  it, 
we  fear  not  for  the  ark  of  God.  There 
are  other  churches  in  which  the  sa- 
cred light  of  truth  shines  with  undira- 
med,  if  not  with  perfect  lustre." 

"  I  have  just  seen,"  says  a  corres- 
pondent of  tlie  same  Magazine,  "  a 
publication  entitled, '  A  Doctrinal  Cat- 
echism of  the  Church  of  England,' 
&c.,  said  to  be  the  production  of  a 
highly  Calvinistic  divine,  who  offici- 
ates in  an  episcopal  chapel,  in  the 
west  end  of  the  town,  not  a  hundred 
miles  from  Tavistock  place,  in  which 
occur  the  following  questions  and  an- 
swers : 

'  1.  Who  are  your  lawful  and  spirit- 
ual pastors .''  The  ministers  of  the 
Church  of  England  in  these  realms. 

'  2.  What  are  they  called  ?  Bish- 
ops, priests,  and  deacons. 

'  3.  Are  not  dissenting  teachers 
ministers  of  the  gospel .''  No ;  they 
have  never  been  called  after  the  man- 
ner of  Aaron. 

'  4.  But  do  they  not  say,  thai  God 
has  called  them  inwardly  ?  Yes  ;  but 
if  he  had,  he  would  have  called  them 
according  to  the  order  of  his  word  out- 
wardly. 

'  5.  What  do  you  mean  by  the  or- 
der of  his  word  ?  They  should  have 
been  appointed  by  "  those  who  have 
public  authority  given  unto  them  in 
the  congregation,  to  call  and  send 
ministers  into  the  Lord's  vineyard," 
and  who  are  also  tlie  apostles'  succes- 
sors. 

'  6.  Who  are  they  ?  The  bishops 
of  the  Church  of  England,  in  the  Eng- 
lish church. 

'  7.  Who  consecrated  the  bishops  ? 
Their  spiritual  predecessors,  and  they 
theirs,  and  so  on,  until  you  come  to 
apostolical  times  and  apostolical  men, 
and  so  to  Christ,  the  founder  of  our 
religion. 

'8.  Who  ordains  priests  and  dea- 
cons ?  The  bishops,  with  the  help  of 
their  presbyters. 

'  9.  Is  it  not  very  wicked  to  assume 
this  sacred  office  ?  It  is ;  as  is  evident 
from  the  case  of  Korah,  Dathan,  and 
Abiram,  mentioned  in  the  xvth  chap- 
ter of  Numbers. 

'  10.  Who  appoints  dissenting  teach- 
ers ?  They  either  wickedly  appoint 
each  other,  or  are  not  appointed  at  all ; 


LECT.  VI.]  LOW-CHURCH    TENDENCIES.  129 

the  avowed  design  of  the  writers  at  the  commencement  of  the  series, 
or  to  acknowledge  that  there  are  many  things  in  them  deserving 
of  the  warmest  commendation.  There  are  certain  fundamental 
principles  recognized,  precious  in  themselves  and  highly  valuable 
and  conservative  when  carried  only  to  their  legitimate  results, 
which,  however  they  may  be  presented  as  novelties,  or  as  old 
truths  long  buried  and  forgotten,  the  churchman  will  recognize 
as  familiar  elements  of  his  creed,  which  have  always  formed 
essential  parts  of  the  constitution  of  his  faith.  If  the  writers 
had  confined  their  discussions  to  the  divine  institution  of  the 
ministry  —  the  apostolical  succession  —  the  defence  of  liturgical 
services  —  an  exposure  of  the  evils  of  schism,  and  the  modern 
rationalistic  theology  ;  if  they  had  displayed  far  more  zeal  than 
they  have,  to  revive  the  wholesome  administration  of  discipline 
in  the  church,  and  a  more  reverent  observance  of  the  festivals 
and  fasts  — my  thorough  church  principles  would  have  prompted 
me  to  bid  them  God-speed,  and  be  a  zealous  co-operator  with 
them  in  their  good  work.  If  they  had  not  gone  beyond  these 
points,  though  some  might  have  questioned  the  validity  of  some 
of  the  arguments  employed,  and  others  have  been  dissatisfied 
with  the  results  at  which  they  arrived  ;  yet  none,  I  believe, 
would  have  complained  of  their  well-intended  efforts  to  fortify  the 
church  in  these  times  of  peril,  by  grounding  her  more  thoroughly 
in  the  intelligent  attachment  of  her  members.  The  peace  of  the 
church  would  have  been  undisturbed,  her  landmarks  unremoved, 
her  foundation  untouched.  When  we  speak,  therefore,  of  the 
Oxford  tracts,  we  speak  not  of  the  truths  they  contain  or  advo- 
cate, which  are  received  and  acknowledged  by  all  sound  church- 
men, but  of  those  things  which  constitute  the'w  jpecuKarity,  their 
characteristic  traits — distinguishing  them  from  the  wellknown 
and  long-received  theology  of  our  church." 

It  is  thus  more  and  more  apparent,  as  we  advance,  that  it  is 

and  so,  in  either  case,  their  assuming  views,   are   now   becominsf  the  most 

the  office  is  very  wicked.  rampant  advocates  of  the  Oxford  her- 

'11.  But  are  not  dissenting  teach-  esy.     It  is  said  that  with  very  fewex- 

ers  thought  to   be    very  good    men  ?  ceptions,  such  as   Baptist  Noel,  there 

They  are  often  thought  to  be   such,  are  no  representatives  in  the  establish- 

and  so  were  Korah,  Dathan,  and  Abi-  ment,  of  the  Scotts,  Newtons,  Venns, 

ram,  till  God  showed  them  to  be  very  and  Cecils  of  the  last  age.     Two  sons 

wicked.  of    the    estimable    Wilberforce,   both 

'12.  But   may    we    not   hear  them  ministersof  that  church,  are  said  to  be 

preach.'     No;  for  God  says,  "  Depart  among  the  most  zealous  defenders  of 

from  the  tents  of  these  wicked  men."  Puseyism.     This    is    a  statement   for 

Again  :  "  It  is  mentioned  in  the  Lon-  which  we  were  not  prepared,  although 

don  Patriot,   a  paper  not  friendly  to  we    have   seen    in    our  own  country, 

the  English  established  church,  that  some  singular  instances  of  low-cliurch 

the  evangelical  party  in  that  church  is  episcopacy    suddenly   veering  to   the 

rapidly  diminishing,  and  that  they  opposite  extreme. "(The  Presbyterian.) 
who   formerly    professed    low-church 

17 


130 


PRELACY    NOT    IN    SCRTPTURB.  [LECT.  VI. 


all  important,  necessary,  and  advisable,  that  these  claims,  by 
which  we  are  to  be  annihilated  in  our  standing,  character,  and 
hopes,  as  a  christian  church,  should  be  brought  to  the  balances 
of  the  sanctuary,  of  history,  and  of  sound  reason,  and  there 
tested.  For  upon  this  issue  depend  the  everlasting  destinies 
of  millions  in  past,  present,  and  long-coming  ages. 

In  our  former  discourse  we  made  an  entrance  into  the  courts 
of  the  temple,  and  there,  with  the  aid  and  assistance  of  these 
very  men  by  whom  we  are  to  be  adjudged,  brought  forth  those 
balances  or  tests,  by  which  the  real  merits  of  such  claims  are 
to  be  tried.  We  now  proceed  to  an  actual  experiment  of  the 
question,  and  to  make  it  manifest  that,  when  weighed  in  these 
balances,  they  are  found,  like  the  doomed  Belshazzar,  Tekel  — 
Tekel. 

We  affirm,   then,  that  these  claims  are  found  radically  de- 
fective when  brought  to  the  balances  of  scripture.     Scripture 
knows  them  not.     They  are  neither  in  it,  nor  of  it,  nor  accord- 
ant with  it.     They  can  only  be  imputed  to  that  sacred  volume, 
when  it  is  opened  amid  the  gloomy  shadows  of  darkening  ages, 
and  when  its  meaning  is  eked  out  by  the  torturing  crucible  of 
ecclesiastical   comments,  groundless    analogies,  and    the  most 
inconclusive  and  illegitimate  inferences.     It  is  only  when  thus 
seen  through  the  stained  light,  which  streams  upon  the  sacred 
pages  from  the  cloistered  windows  of  cathedrals,  abbeys,  and 
monkish  cells,  that   the  scriptures  can  be  made  to  speak  in 
the  tones,  and  in  the  language,  of  prelacy.     For  this   doctrine 
of  apostolic  succession,  and  for  its  distinctions  of  orders  and 
functions,  as  of  divine    right    and   de  Jide,    and   therefore  es- 
sential ;  we  dare  boldly  challenge  the  production  of  any  thing 
like  a  warranty,  from  the  only  infallible  rule  of  faith  and  prac- 
tice.    These  distinctions,  we  aver,  are  the  offspring  of  time  and 
custom,  and  the  progressive  advancement  of  spiritual  despotism 
in  the  church.     They  are  not,  therefore,  "  de  ,/?rfe,"  but  are 
"  dejure  ecclesiastico  ; '^  and  their  authority  can  rise  no  higher 
than  its  source,  and  must  sink  with  the  depression  of  that  source 
to  its  just  subordination  to   the  higher  authority  of  God's  only 
and  true  record.     Such    prelatic   distinctions   and    deductions, 
with  all  their  attendant  claims,  are  on  the  evidence  of  a  firm 
defender  of  episcopacy,  "  glaringly  at  variance  with  the  usage 
of  the  apostolic  church,'"  and  could   only  have  arisen    when 
"  churchmen  had  renounced  all  respect  for  the  example  and  in- 
junctions  of  the  inspired    founders  of  Christianity."      These 
"  divine  episcopal  prerogatives,"  this  "  consummation  of  church 

1)  Im&c  Taylor  in  Spiritual  Deapotism,  p.  208. 


LECT.    VI.]  THE    VARIATIONS    OF   PRELACY.  131 

power,"  irresponsible  and  uncontrollable,  is  not  apostolic,  — 
however  it  may  be  ancient  Christianity.  There  is  not,  we  re- 
peat, a  single  text  in  the  Bible,  from  which  they  are  fairly  de- 
ducible. 

Indeed,  we  have  already  shown,  that  but  few  of  the  advocates 
of  this  system  have  been  hardy  enough  to  bring  prelacy  to  the 
test  of  scripture  at  all.  It  is  allowed  by  most,  that  the  doctrine 
is  not  there,  in  any  degree  of  plainness ;  by  many  more,  that 
it  is  the  result  of  a  legitimate  legislative  power  possessed  by  the 
church,  and  that  it  is,  therefore,  binding  ;  by  others,  that  the 
polity  of  the  apostolic  ages  was  of  necessity  immature  and  un- 
fitted for  the  perfect  condition  of  the  church  ;  and  by  still  others, 
that  no  form  of  polity  is,  in  itself,  enjoined,  required,  or  essen- 
tial. Nor  have  those,  who  venture  to  test  episcopacy  by  scrip- 
ture, been  able  to  agree  among  themselves  on  the  first  princi- 
ples of  their  sacred  institutes.  Some  base  their  theory  on  the 
extinct  Jewish  sacerdotal  orders ;  some  make  Christ  the  first 
link  in  the  chain  of  prelates,  and  the  first  of  the  order ;  some 
trace  their  high  pedigree  to  the  apostles  ;  some  transform  the 
humble  presbyters,  as  referred  to  in  the  epistles,  into  prelates. 
All  are  obliged  to  dress  up  the  missionaries  of  the  cross,  who 
went  forth  as  evangelists  to  preach  the  gospel,  and  to  set 
in  order  what  was  wanting  in  the  incipient  and  chaotic  mass 
which  formed  the  crude  materials  of  the  early  church  ;  in  the 
pontifical  robes  of  gowned  and  mitred  prelates.'  Nor  is  there 
one  advocate,  who  can  stand  firm  on  the  foundation  of  scrip- 
ture, and  build  from  its  materials  alone,  the  fabric  of  prelacy. 
We  find  even  the  crowned  champion,  who  has  lately  carried  off 
the  laurels,  (episcopalians  being  judges,)  in  his  battle  for  the 
scriptural  authority  of  episcopacy,  actually  substantiating,  as  we 
have  seen,  an  arch  stone  of  the  whole  building,  on  the  authority 
of  a  father,  who  lived  in  the  fifth  century  !  According  to  some, 
the  essence  of  episcopacy  consists  in  three  orders,  essentially 
distinct,  and  ordained  de  jure  divino,  and  by  inspiration  of  the 
Holy  Ghost ;  so  that  the  one  cannot  perform  the  functions  of 
the  other  with  any  propriety,  nor  with  any  efficacy  what- 
ever. But  it  is  now  granted,  by  Mr.  Palmer,  that  the  orders 
of  bishops  and  presbyters  are  identical,  differing  not  in  essence 
or  nature,  but  only  in  degree  and  in  a  very  few  functionary 
offices.*  The  order  of  deacon,  he  says,  is  not  a  spiritual 
order  at  all,  but  only  a  temporal  order,  and  not  formally  pos- 

1)  See  Wks.  on   Episcopacy,  p.  2)  Palmer  on  Church,  vol.  ii.  pp. 

420.  See  Episcopacy  Tested  by  Scrip-      375,  400,  398,  403,  439. 
ture.  by  Bishop  Onderdoak,  and  gen- 
er&IIj. 


132  SCRIPTURE    PROOF    CHALLENGED.  [lECT.  VI., 

sessed,  either  by  their  ordination  or  by  the  ritual,  with  any  cure 
of  souls,  or  jurisdiction,  or  power  of  celebrating  divine  service, 
or  any  duties,  other  than  of  a  "  temporal,  or  at  least  a  very  infe- 
rior character."' 

In  short,  there  is  no  unison  whatever  among  prelatic  divines,  ex- 
cept in  the  opinion,  that  prelacy  must  be  upheld  and  maintained.* 

"  My  antiquity  is  Christ  Jesus,"  said  Ignatius ;  and  we 
deny  the  authority  of  this  true  and  only  valuable  antiquity,  for 
this  system  of  prelacy ;  as  it  assumes  to  be  the  only  efficacious 
fountain  of  that  plenitude  of  episcopal  grace,  which  is  to  flow, 
in  augmenting  power,  along  the  growing  lines  of  apostolical 
descent. 

It  is  not  our  purpose  here  to  enter  into  the  argument  from 
the  identity  of  bishops  and  presbyters,  as  the  one  order  of  the 
christian  ministry.  This  position,  as  we  have  shown,  is  now  in 
some  measure  granted  by  one  of  the  ablest  advocates  of  the 
prelatic  system,  and  will  come  under  review  at  another  stage  of 
our  discussion.^  Nor  is  this  question  essential  to  the  present 
inquiry,  which  is  —  supposing  this  distinction  to  be  allowed  — 
Do  the  scriptures  teach,  that  the  order  of  prelates  is  essential  to 
the  continuance  of  the  church,  so  that  without  it,  the  church  is 
deprived  of  its  vital  organ,  —  its  brain,  —  the  very  source  of  all  its 
living  energies?  Do  they  teach,  and  where  do  they  teach,  that 
this  order,  by  divine  appointment,  is  the  sole  and  exclusive 
fountain  and  depository  of  heavenly  influences  ;  and  that  through 
it,  as  such,  these  influences  would  be  continued,  in  an  unbroken 
personal  succession,  along  which  this  electric  power  might  in- 
visibly and  potently  communicate  itself,  to  the  end  of  time  ? 
This  is  the  fact  to  be  made  plain  from  scripture  ;  and  that,  too, 
not  by  strained  analogies,  or  far-fetched  inferences,  or  fanciful 
and  gratuitous  interpretations,  between  which  and  those  adopt- 
ed, as  the  basis  of  the  papacy,  there  is  no  essential  distinction ; 
so  that,  if  prelacy  be  true,  and  on  these  grounds  ;  the  papacy  can- 
not be  proved  untrue.* 

When  we  come  to  substantiate,  as  we  hope  to  do,  the  scrip- 
tural claims  of  presbyters  to  the  true  apostolical  succession,  we 
shall  feel  called  upon  to  advance  those  scriptural  grounds,  upon 

1)  Palmer,  pp.  408,375,404,  405.  that  this  succession,  as  far  as  it  was 

2)  See  Note  A.  transmitted  at  all,  was  lianded  over  to 

3)  For  this  discussion  see  our  presbyters  or  bishops  the  Word  of  God 
subsequent  volume.  makes  certain  —  but  that  it  was  given 

4)  "  Even  allowing  the  truth  and  to  any  order  of  diocesan  prelates,  is 
necessity  of  the  doctrine  of  apostolical  what  never  can  be  shown,  even  were 
succession,  there  is  still  a  most  impor-  Timothy  and  Titus  both  supposed  to 
tant  question,  viz.  in  what  line  of  be  (incredible  supposition)  apostles." 
church  polity  was  it  to  run  ?  Was  it  See  Arciier's  Six  Lect.  on  Puseyism, 
to  he  prelatical  or  presbyterian  .'  Now  Lect,  v. 


LECT.  VI.] 


PRELACY   OVERTHROWN    BY   SCRIPTURE. 


13^ 


which  such  claims  are  based.  But  in  canvassing  the  scriptural 
title  of  this  doctrine  of  prelatic  succession,  which  is  made  to  su- 
persede and  to  overthrow  every  other,  we  cannot  be  expected 
to  discover  any  such  scripture  proofs  for  its  support,  when  even 
our  opponents  have  failed  to  produce  them  from  the  divine 
record.^  On  the  contrary,  as  has  been  already  seen,  but  little 
pretension  has  been  made,  by  the  ablest  defenders  of  this  sys- 
tem, to  any  thing  like  an  express  divine  warrant. 

As,  therefore,  those  particular  passages  which  are  adduced  in 
refutation  of  the  claims  of  presbyters,  and  in  substantiation  of 
those  of  prelates,  will  be  more  fitly  considered  when  we  are 
prepared  to  advance  our  own  demands,  we  will  in  this  lecture 
present  some  general  considerations,  by  which  we  would  hope 
to  show,  that  this  entire  scheme  is  most  gratuitously  ascribed  to 
God's  holy  word. 

Now,  that  we  may  not  unnecessarily  prolong  this  discussion, 
we  would  remark,  that  it  has  been  fully  and  elaborately  shown, 
by  a  recent  and  very  learned  episcopal  writer  of  the  evangelical 
school,  that  this  whole  system  of  high-church  prelacy,  and  this 
exclusive  claim  to  apostolical  descent  in  particular,  is  in  direct 


1)  That  prelatists  can  make  some 
show  of  scripture  proof,  and  appear  to 
rest  upon  it  as  authority,  is  nothing  to 
the  point,  since,  as  Dr.  Bowden  al- 
lows, fWks.  on  Epis.  vol.  i.  p.  109,) 
"  it  is  scarcely  possible  to  produce 
texts  of  scripture  for  any  point  what- 
ever, that  may  not  be  obscured  by 
plausible  objections.  Ingenuity  is  nev- 
er at  a  loss  ;  and  when  it  is  excited  to 
exertion  by  prejudice,  and  by  an  at- 
tachment to  a  particular  hypothesis,  it 
is  extremely  difficult  to  diminish  its 
vigor,  and  to  divest  it  of  all  its  subter- 
fuges." 

"They  cannot,  however,  prove," 
Bays  Dr.  Mitchell,  in  his  Letters  to 
Bishop  Skinner,  (p.  85,)  "  that  any 
subordination,  implying  authority  on 
the  one  hand  and  sul)jection  on  the 
other,  existed  among  christian  minis- 
ters in  the  apostolic  church ;  nor  can 
they  find  their  three  orders  among  the 
offices  instituted  by  the  apostles. 
Hence,  lest  the  exhibition  of  the  three 
orders,  consisting  of  our  Lord  himself, 
his  apostles,  and  the  seventy,  should  not 
put  to  silence  all  gainsayers,  they  have 
recourse  to  the  following  curious  strat- 
agem. They  fix  upon  a  passage,  in 
which  Paul  enumerates  eight  different 
orders  of  ecclesiastical  officers,  who 
were  all  supernaturally  endowed  and 


set  in  the  church,  not  by  the  apostles, 
who  were  themselves  one  of  l.he  eight 
orders,  but  by  Jesus  Christ.  Without 
deigning  to  give  a  reason  for  their  re- 
jection of  five  of  those  orders,  as  not 
making  part  of  the  apostolic  model, 
they  do,  without  any  ceremony,  seize 
upon  three,  and  then  hollow  in  the 
ears  of  presbyterians,  "  these  seem  to 
be  all  the  standmg  orders  established 
in   the   church.     Behold    the    divine 

model    of   the    '  sacred  hierarchy.' 

Adopt  it  and  be  saved,  or  '  reject  it, 
and  go  to  perdition,  as  you  please  !  '  " 
"  1  have  looked  over  my  Bible  with 
some  attention,"  (says  Sir  Michael 
Foster,  Knt,  in  his  Examination  of  the 
Scheme  of  Church  Power,  1736,  p.  8,) 
"  and  do  not  find  any  of  the  powers 
his  lordship  speaks  of  vested  in  the 
episcopal  order,  exclusive  of  the 
church,  or  body  of  believers.  I  have 
likewise  consulted  some  learned  men 
who  have  made  these  matters  their 
study,  and  they  tell  me,  that  none  of 
the  bishops  of  the  first  three  hundred 
years  after  Christ  claimed  any  .separ- 
ate exclusive  powers  for  the  exercise 
of  church  discipline,  but  left  those 
matters  to  the  provincial  and  diocesan 
consistories,  which,  in  the  purer  ages 
of  the  church,  were  composed  of  bish- 
ops, clergy,  and  laity." 


134  PRELACY   VERSUS   SCRIPTTTRE   TEACHING.  [lECT.   VI. 

antagonism  to  the  whole  spirit  and  genius  of  our  Lord's  teach- 
ing. This  heavy  charge  he  substantiates  by  an  examination  of 
several  of  the  most  prominent  of  our  Lord's  parables  and  pre- 
dictions/ The  same  conclusion  he  has  also  drawn  from  an 
extensive  induction  of  particulars  in  the  Book  of  Acts,  the 
first  and  the  only  inspired  record  of  the  early  church  ;  and  in 
which,  if  any  where  in  scripture,  these  doctrines  must  have  been 
fully  brought  out. 

It  is  unnecessary  for  us,  as  this  work  has  been  republished, 
and  is  in  circulation  amon^  us,  to  enter  at  length  into  this  same 
argument.  We  would,  however,  call  attention  to  a  ievf  remarks. 
When  prelatic  writers  quote  in  proof  of  their  exclusive  pow- 
ers such  passages  of  scripture  as  these,  —  "  as  my  Father  hath 
sent  me,  even  so  send  I  you"  —  "I  am  with  you  always,  even 
unto  the  end  of  the  world"  —  "I  appoint  unto  you  a  kingdom, 
as  my  Father  hath  appointed  me,"*  —  it  is  sufficient  to  reply,  that 
their  applicability  depends  on  the  assumption  as  true,  of  the 
very  question  in  dispute  ;  and  that  they  can  have  no  pertinency 
whatever,  as  an  argument  in  favor  of  prelates,  until  the  ap- 
pointment of  such  an  order  of  ministers,  as  of  permanent  and 
necessary  standing  in  the  church,  has  been  otherwise  made 
plain.^  Until  this  is  done,  we  claim  all  such  passages,  in  all 
the  fulness  of  their  meaning,  for  the  ministry  of  the  church  in 

1)  See  Ancient  Christianity,  vol.  delivered  with  a  Bolemn  design  of  fix- 
i.  See  also  Potter  on  Ch.  Govt.,  pp.  ing  a  constitution  for  succeeding 
124,  125,  who  explains  the  parables  as      ages." 

referring  to  church  offices  while  there,  "I  have  been  sometimes  disposed 

is  manifestly  no  allusion  to  different  to  think,"   says   Dr.   Mitchell  in  his 

orders,  but  to  one  only.  Letters  to  Bishop  Skinner,    (p.   87,) 

2)  See  Percival  on  the  Apost.  "  that  '  Lo,  I  am  v;ith  you  always 
Succ.  p.  61.  unto  the  end  of  the  world,'  means,  '  I 

3)  Paley,afler  quoting  these  very  will  never  cease  to  support  the  reli- 
passages,  (as  my  Father  hath  sent,  gion  which  I  have  commissioned  you 
&c.,)  adds:  (Works,  vol.  vi.  p.  91,)  to  publish ; '  and  that  it  is  parallel  to 
"  These  are  all  general  directions,  the  promise  which  follows  :  '  On  this 
supposing,  indeed,  the  existence  of  a  rock  will  I  build  my  church,  and  the 
regular  ministry  in  the  church,  but  gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail  against 
describing  no  specific  order  of  pre-  it ;' and  that  both  promises  refer  rath- 
eminence  or  distribution  of  office  and  er  to  the  stability  and  duration  of  the 
authority.  If  any  other  instances  can  religion  itself,  than  to  those  of  the 
be  adduced  more  circumstantial  than  hiffhest  order  of  its  ministers.  I  was 
these,  they  will  be  found,  like  the  the  more  confirmed  in  this  opinion,  by 
appointment  of  the  seven  deacons,  having  read  that  Christianity  has  sub- 
the  collections  for  the  saints,  the  lay-  sisted  in  some  places,  and  even  flour- 
ing by  in  store  upon  the  first  day  of  ished,  independently  of  diocesan  bish- 
the  week,  to  be  rules  of  the  society,  ops.  But  it  seems  1  have  been  in  a 
rather  than  laws  of  the  religion —  mistake.  Both  the  passages  referred 
recommendations  and  expedients  fit-  to,  must  relate  to  the  duration  of  epia- 
ted  to  the  state  of  the  several  churches  copacy,  till  the  heavens  and  earth  fly 
by  tiiose  who  then  administered  the  away  :  so  that  '  On  this  rock  will  1 
affairs  of  them,  rather  than  precepts  build  my  church '  must  eigaify,  'On 


LECT.  VI.]         UNIVERSALITY  OF  PBESBYTERT.  135 

general.  And  since  it  is  not  disputed  that  presbyters  were  di- 
vinely instituted  as  a  perpetual  order  in  the  christian  ministry ; 
while  for  the  order  of  prelates,  we  boldly  deny  that  there  is  any 
warrant  from  God  ;  therefore  do  we  appropriate  these  glorious 
declarations  —  until  wrested  from  them  by  well-grounded  assur- 
ance —  to  the  order  of  presbyters. 

It  is  "  indeed,"  says  Dr.  Mitchell,  in  his  Letters  *to  Bishop 
Skinner,  "  an  apostolic  precept,  which  our  vindicator  does  not 
suffer  us  to  forget  —  '  obey  them  that  have  rule  over  you,  and 
submit  yourselves  ;  for  they  watch  for  your  souls,  as  they  that 
must  give  an  account.'  But  the  obedience  and  submission  here 
enjoined,  of  whatever  nature  they  may  be,  are  exacted  from 
the  people  to  their  pastors,  not  from  one  order  of  ecclesiastics 
to  another.  Nay,  I  can  produce  some  passages  in  which  all 
christians,  both  pastors  and  people,  are  commanded  to  '  be  sub- 
ject to  one  another,  and  to  submit  themselves  one  to  another 
in  the  fear  of  God.'  But  I  have  not  met  with  a  passage, 
which  says  either  explicitly,  or  by  implication,  '  presbyters 
and  deacons,  obey  them  that  have  the  rule  over  you,  for  they 
waich  for  your  souls.'  When  high-church  shall  show  me  a 
passage  to  this  purpose,  I  shall  acknowledge  that  her  divine 
model,  like  the  image  of  the  great  goddess  Diana,  and  the  Pal- 
ladium of  Troy,  undoubtedly  fell  down  from  Jupiter."" 

It  is  certainly  very  remarkable,  that  we  may  apply  to  presby- 
ters the  words  of  Jablonski,  as  quoted  by  Mr.  Percival,  and  which 
he  applies  to  prelates,'  "  that  there  is  no  doctrine  or  tenet  of  the 
christian  religion,  in  which  all  christians  in  general  have,  for  the 
space  of  eighteen  hundred  years,  so  unanimously  agreed,  as  in 
this  of  '  presbytery,  as  being  a  certain  and  necessary  order  of  the 
christian  ministry.'  "  "  In  all  ages  and  times  down  from  the 
apostles,  and  in  all  places  through  Europe,  Asia,  and  Africa, 
wheresoever  there  were  christians,  there  were  also  presbyters ; 
and  even  where  christians  differed  in  other  points  of  doctrine 

this  rock  will  I  build  the  episcopate,'  loins  who  should  succeed  in  preach- 

and   Presbyterians  and   independents  ing  and  baptism,  and  through  whom 

'  shall  not  prevail  against  it.'  "  a  successive  powerful  assertance  of  the 

We  will  here  present  also  the  judg-  spirit  is  to  be  transferred  in  and  through 

ment  of  Archbishop  Usher,  as  given  those  to  the  end  of  the  world.  '         ° 

by   Dr.  Bernard,  (Certain  Discourses  This  very  promise,  (John  xx.  21  - 

by  the   late  Archbishop   of  Armagh,  23,)  was  embodied  by  the  English  re- 

Lond.  1657,  p.l57.)  "  That  last  speech  formers  in  their  office  for  the  ordina- 

of  our  Saviour,  (Matt,  xxviii.,  Lo  I  am  tion  of  presbyters,  and  was  continued 

with  you,  (fee, )  cannot  be  limited  to  in  its  application  to  them  until  the  year 

the  persons  of  the  apostles,  (with  whose  1661.     See  also  Note  B. 

deaths  these  administrations   did  not  1)  Letters,  p.  84. 

expire,)  but  must  be  understood  col-  2)  See  Percival  on  Apos.   Succ. 

lectively  of  the   whole  body  of  the  p.  53. 
ministry,  then,  as  it  were,  in    their 


136 


UNIVERSALITY    OF   PRESBYTERY. 


[LECT.  VI. 


or  custom,  and  made  schisms  and  divisions  in  the  church,  yet 
did  they  all  remain  unanimous  in  retaining  their  presbyters."^ 

As  there  is  this  universal  consent  as  it  regards  the  order  of 
presbyters,  while  for  the  order  of  prelates,  as  held  forth  in  this 
doctrine  of  prelatical  succession,  there  can  be  given  no  proof  ei- 
ther from  holy  writ,  or  the  earliest  ages,^  —  then  surely  these  and 


1)  Dr.  Edwards,  a  very  learned 
divine  of  tlie  reign  of  Queen  Anne, 
CTheolog.  Reformat,  vol.  i.  p.  523,) 
after  a  careful  examination  of  the  sev- 
eral texts  bearing  on  the  subject,  draws 
the  following  conclusion  :  "  Thus  we 
can  show  the  time  when  we  are  sure 
THERE  was  a  pRESBYTEKY  ;  but  we 
can't  say  there  was  episcopacy  at 
THAT  time  in  the  church.  This  is 
owned  by  some  of  the  most  celebrated 
writers  of  our  church  ;  and  even  Mr. 
Dodwell,  who  was  thought  by  his 
friends  to  be  as  able  a  defender  of 
episcopacy  as  any  they  had,  confesses 
there  were  no  such  fixed  rulers  as 
bishops  in  the  church  at  first.  (De 
JureLeic.  cap.  3,  §  \4.)  Dr.  Whitby 
shows  the  same,  and  is  large  in  the 
proof  of  it,  (Ann.  on  1  Thess.  ch.  5.)" 
Dr.  Edwards  then  goes  on  to  chastise 
a  confident  braggadocio,  the  author  of 
the  "  Rehearsal,"  and  asks,  "  Where, 
then,  is  our  great  boaster,  who  chal- 
lenges all  mankind  to  prove  that  pres- 
byters were  before  bishops  ?  Is  it  not 
plain,  from  all  the  afore  cited  scrip- 
tures, viz.,  Acts  xi.  29,  30;  Acts  xiv. 
23;  Acts  XV.  2,  4,  6,  22,  23;  Acts 
xvi.  4 ;  Acts  xx.  17,  28,  and  Titus, 
i.  5:  James,  v.  4;  1  Pet.  v.  1;  and 
the  suffrage  of  episcopal  writers  them- 
selves, that  presbyters  had  the  start 
of  bishops,  whatever  this  pretender 
makes  a  show  of,  and  notwithstand- 
ing his  telling  us,  that  this  is  the 
single  point,  on  which  the  whole  con- 
troversy depends.'  If  it  be  so,  he 
must  own  himself  baffled,  and  all  his 
pretensions  are  empty  and  insignifi- 
cant."    See  also  note  C. 

2)  "  As  for  those  proofs,"  says  Mr. 
Baynes,  in  his  Diocesan's  Tryall, 
Lond.  1621  p.  45,)  "  that  bishops  have 
been,  throughout  all  churches  from  the 
beginning,  they  are  weak.  For  first, 
the  council  of  Nice  useth  utt  a^x.'^c,  not 
simpliciter,  but  secundum  quid,  in  or- 
der happily  to  that  time  wherein  the 
custom  began,  which  was  better  known 
to  them  than  to  us ;  the  phrase  is  so 
used,  Acts  XV.  8,  in  respect  to  some 


things  which  had  not  continued  many 
years.  They  cannot  mean  the  apos- 
tles' times,  fur  then  metropolitans 
should  have  actually  been  from  the 
apostles'  time.  Secondly,  the  phrase 
of  the  council  of  Ephesus  is  likewise 
equivocal ;  for  they  have  reference  to 
the  fathers  of  Nice,  or  at  least  the  de- 
crees of  the  fathers,  who  went  before 
the  council  of  Nice.  For,  those  words 
being  added  definitiones  JYiccnce  Jidei, 
seem  to  explain  the  former,  canoncs 
apostolorum.  It  is  plain,  the  decree 
of  the  council  doth  ascribe  this  thing 
only  to  ancient  custom  no  less  than 
that  of  Nice,  Constantinople,  and  Chal- 
cedon ;  and,  therefore,  cannot  rise  to 
the  authority  of  sacred  scriptures.  Let 
him  show,  in  all  antiquity,  where  sa- 
cred scriptures  are  called  canons  of  the 
apostles.  Finally,  if  this  phrase  note 
rules  given  by  the  apostles,  then  the 
apostles  themselves  did  set  out  the 
bounds  of  Cyprus  and  Antioch.  As 
for  the  authority  of  Cyprian,  he  doth 
testify  what  was  communicated  in  his 
time,  bishops  ordained  in  cities ;  not 
universaliter,  as  if  there  were  no  city 
but  had  some.  Secondly,  he  speaketh 
of  bishops  who  had  their  churches  in- 
cluded in  cities,  not  more  than  they 
might  meet  together  in  one,  to  any 
common  deliberations.  They  had  no 
diocesan  churches,  nor  were  bishops 
who  had  majority  of  rule  over  their 
presbyters,  nor  sole  power  of  ordina- 
tion. As  for  the  catalogue  of  succes- 
sion, it  is  pompcE  aptior  quam  pugna; 
Rome  can  recite  their  successors.  But 
because  it  hath  no  bishops,  ergo,  oecu- 
menical bishops,  is  no  consequence. 
All  who  are  named  bishops  in  the  cat- 
alogue were  not  of  one  cut,  and  in  that 
sense  we  controvert." 

"  Now  as  to  the  business  in  hand," 
says  Bishop  Croft,  in  his  Nalied 
Truth,  or  the  True  State  of  the  Prim- 
itive Church,  (Scott's  Coll.  of  Tr. 
vol.  vii.  p.  302,)  "  I  cannot  yield,  that 
the  scripture  is  very  doubtful  in  it,  or 
scarce  doubtful  at  all ;  for,  though  in 
scripture  it  is  noti«  terminis  s^id,  pres- 


LECT.  VI.]          Christ's  coNDEMNATroN  of  prelacy.  137 

all  similar  passages,  must  be  understood  of  presbyters,  and  must 
be  considered  as  conclusive  warrant  for  their  divine  prerogatives. 

According  to  the  plain  and  evident  meaning  of  his  words,  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  expressly  denounces  this  system  of  prelatical 
supremacy,  in  its  embryo  spirit,  when  he  told  his  disciples  —  "  ye 
know  that  they  who  are  accounted  to  rule  over  the  Gentiles, 
exercise  lordship  over  them,  and  their  great  ones  exercise  au- 
thority upon  them.  But  so  shall  it  not  be  among  you." 
(Mark  x.  42,  43.)  For,  in  making  their  ambitious  request, 
the  sons  of  Zebedee  desired  not  merely  an  elevated  post  of 
honor,  but  such  an  one  as  would  exalt  them  above  their  breth- 
ren. It  was  the  desire  of  official  pre-eminence,  and  a  higher 
rank  and  order  in  the  arrangements  of  their  fondly  imagined  hi- 
erarchy, which  our  Saviour  so  severely  rebuked,  when  he  told 
them,  that  among  the  rulers  of  his  spiritual  kingdom — the 
ministers  of  his  church,  —  there  should  be  no  such  distinctions 
of  rank,  all  being  of  one  order,  and  equal  in  power. i  To 
strengthen  this  conviction  in  their  minds,  our  Lord  presented  to 
them  his  own  example,  saying,  "  For  even  the  Son  of  Man 
came  not  to  be  ministered  unto,  but  to  minister."^ 

So,  also,  when  the  disciples  had  contended  among  them- 
selves who  should  be  greatest,  (see  Mark  ix.  33  -  37,)  that  is, 
who  should  be  first  amongst  the  apostles,  in  their  expectation  of 
the  speedy  establishment  of  his  kingdom,  our  Lord  "checked 
their  ambitious  designs,"  by  the  declaration,  "  He  that  is  greatest 
among  you,"  in  his  own  ambitious  aspirations,  "  let  him  be  as 
the  younger."^ 

bytery  and  episcopacy  are  both   one  alleged   distinctions  between   bishops 

and  the  same  order,  yet  the  same  cir-  and  presbyters,  largely  confuted  in  the 

cumstantial  expressions  are  (as  1  have  Altare  Damascenum  Davidis  Calder- 

showed)  so  strong  and  many,  that  they  wood,  p.    149-190,  &.C.,  and   cap.  4, 

are  equivalent  to  a  clear  expression  in  p.  86-  143. 

terminis.  Secondly.  This  is  not  a  mat-  1)  The  Rev.  T.  H.  Home,  preb- 
ter  of  any  indifferency,  but  of  vast  and  endary  of  St.  Paul's,  says:  "Jesus 
dangerous  consequence,  if  mistaken.  Christ  prohibited  all  disputes  con- 
That  a  church  without  such  bishops  cerning  rank  and  pre-eminency  in  his 
as  you  require,  cannot  be  truly  called  kingdom."  "Ye  know,"  says  he, 
a  church,  and  so  we  shall  exclude  "  that  the  princes  of  the  Gentiles  ex- 
niany  godly  reformed  churches  ;  for  if  ercise  dominion  over  them,  and  they 
bishops  be  of  such  a  superior,  distinct  that  are  great  exercise  authority  upon 
order  as  you  pretend,  if  the  power  of  them.  But  it  shall  not  he  so  among 
ordination  be  inherent  in  them  only;  t/om  ;  but  whosoever  will  be  great 
then,  where  no  bishop,  no  true  priests  among  you,  let  him  be  your  minister  ; 
ordained  ;  where  no  priests,  no  sacra-  and  wiiosoever  will  be  cliief  among 
ments;  where  no  sacraments,  no  you,  let  him  be  your  servant."  Matt, 
cluireh.    Wherefore  I  iiumbly  beseech  xx.  2-5  -27. 

you,  be  not  too  positive  in  this  point,  2)   Hinds'   Family  Lecturer,  Ox- 

lest  thereby  you  do  not  only  condemn  ford,  1829,  p   127. 
all  the  reformed  churches,  but  the  scrip-  3)   See  ibid,  p.  123. 

ture   and  St.  Paul     also."     See   their 

18 


138  Christ's  condemnation  of  prelacy.  [lect.  vi. 

All  spiritual  jurisdiction,  therefore,  claimed  by  any  one  por- 
tion of  Christ's  ministers  over  otiiers,  as  a  supreme  order ;  and  as 
such,  as  necessary  or  of  divine  right,  is  a  plain  and  palpable  viola- 
tion of  this  enactment  of  the  divine  author  of  Christianity.  Nor 
will  it  avail  any  thing  to  say,  that  Christ  made  to  his  apostles, 
on  another  occasion,  a  special  promise  of  such  distinction,  when 
he  said,  "  Ye  shall  sit  on  thrones,  judging  the  twelve  tribes  of 
Israel ; "  for,  in  these  words,  our  Lord  had  evident  reference  to 
the  future  retributions  of  the  eternal  world,  when,  as  he  de- 
clares, "  the  Son  of  Man  shall  sit  on  the  throne  of  his  glory." 
Thus  plainly  does  it  appear  that  the  church  of  Christ,  as  de- 
signed by  our  "  Saviour,"  was  to  be  moulded  in  direct  contra- 
riety to  prelacy,  and  upon  the  very  principles  of  presbyterian 
parity. 

And  whereas  this  doctrine  teaches,  that  the  blessing  of  the 
covenant,  and  the  favor  of  Christ,  can  only  be  found  within  the 
limits  of  this  sacerdotal  line  of  prelates  ;  it  is  to  be  observed,  that 
we  have  declarations  in  scripture,  which  prove  that  the  grace  of 
God  is  not  limited,  in  its  bestowal,  to  such  arbitrary  boundaries 
as  prelatic  formalists  would  prescribe.''  When  the  disciples  saw 
one  who  followed  not  with  them  casting  out  devils  in  Chiist's 
name,  they  were  anxious  to  prohibit,  and  to  depose  him  from 
his  unauthorized  ministry.  But  Jesus,  we  are  told,  not  only 
sanctioned  his  ministry,  and  continued  his  favor  towards  him,  as 
he  did  afterwards  to  ApoUos,  (Acts  xviii.  24,)  but  proceeded 
to  chide  his  blinded  and  erring  disciples,  and  to  lay  down  this 
universal  rule  for  the  future  guidance  of  his  church  ;  "  for  there 
is  no  man  who  shall  do  a  miracle  " — or  give  manifestation  of  any 
spiritual  power,  in  the  preaching  of  the  gospel  —  "in  my  name, 
that  can  lightly  speak  evil  of  me ;  for  he  that  is  not  against  us 

1)  See  Matthew  Henry's  sermon  public  worship,  or  so  much  as  private 
*' On  Disputes  Reviewed."  Wks,  meetings;  for  Elijah  would  surely 
Lond.  1830,  p.  781,  §  iv.  on  "  Dis-  have  known  of  these,  and  been  the 
putes  about  Precedence  and  Superi-  principal  among  them  :  far  less  could 
ority."  they     have    had   organized  churches 

2)  On  this  point,  the  language  of  with  pastors  and  rulers  over  them, 
the  Rev.  Mr.  Leslie,  (who,  in  arguing  without  being  known  to  Elijah  and  to 
with  dissenters,  is  most  severe  and  il-  many  more,  even  to  their  persecutors, 
liberal,)  in  his  Short  Method  with  the  who  found  out  the  most  private  re- 
Romanists,  is  very  strong.  (Edinb.  cesses  of  the  primitive  Christians,  and 
1835,  p.  50.  "But  that  state  of  the  their  meetings,  though  in  the  most 
church  is  better  represented  by  the  secret  manner,  for  divine  worship; 
seven  thousand  who  had  not  bowed  to  and  their  bishops,  too,  whom  they 
Baal,  but  of  whom  Elijah  knew  none,  seized  and  dragged  to  prisons  and  to 
but  thought  he  was  '  left  alone,'  (Rom.  martyrdom,  for  they  could  not  lie  hid, 
xi.  3,  4.)  This  was  a  state  of  segre-  and  the  faith  was  then  visible,  though 
gallon;  there  were  particular  persons  under  persecution."  See  also  Bax- 
who  kept  the  faith,  but  invisible  to  the  ter's  Five  Disputations  of  Church 
world  or  to  one  another,  without  any  Government,  Lond.  1650,  p.  242.  See 

also  Note  D. 


LECT.  Vt.]         CHRIST  CONDEMNS  PRELACY. 


139 


is  on  our  part,"  (Mark  ix.  38  -40.)  So  also  that  other  decla- 
ration, which  is  agreeable  to  the  promise  made  in  the  ministe- 
rial commission,  "  where  two  or  three  are  gathered  together  in 
my  name,  there  am  I  in  the  midst  of  them." 

We  have  also  passages  which  give  fearful  warning  of  the 
guilt  which  is  incurred  by  those,  who  arrogate  to  themselves 
offices  and  powers  unauthorized  by  God's  word.  The  fate  of 
Dathan  and  Abiram,  of  Korah  and  his  company,  of  Jeroboam 
also,  (see  Numb.  ch.  xvi.  and  1  Kings,  xiii.  34,)  and  of  the 
seven  sons  of  Sceva  the  Jew,  as  recorded  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment,^ (Acts  xix.  13-15,)  should  admonish  all  who  would 
usurp  a  power  and  dignity  which  Christ  never  gav^  to  them, 
but  contrariwise  forbade,  that  they  shall  not  escape  the  indig- 
nation of  God. 

Not  less  plain  are  those  express  precepts,  in  which  we  are 
called  upon  to  beware  of  such  daring  presumption,  on  the  part 
of  all  who  should  be  found  treading  in  the  steps  of  the  ancient 
rabbis,  and,  like  them,  extorting  from  their  followers  a  homage 
to  which  they  have  no  title.  "  Be  ye  not  called  rabbi,"  says 
Christ  to  his  disciples,  and  through  them  to  all  his  future  minis- 
ters; "for  ONE  is  your  master,  even  Christ,  and  all  ye  are 
BRETHREN  ;  and  call  no  man  your  father,"  (or  right  reverend 
father  in  God,)  "  upon  earth ;  for  one  is  your  Father,  which 
is  m  heaven.  Neither  be  ye  called  masters,"  {viu^VjyviTCii  leaders 
or  guides,  the  very  idea  conveyed  by  the  term  prelate,)  "  for 
ONE  is  your  master,  even  Christ."  (Matt,  xxiii.  8-11.  See 
also  Mark  x.  4-2-45  ;  Mark  xx.  25  -28  ;  Luke  xxii.  25-27. 

Now,  the  very  head  and  front  of  the  offending  of  these  ancient 
rabbis  was,  their  ostentatious  assumption  of  such  prelatic  thles ; 
their  bold  pretensions  to  such  prelatic  deference  and  regard,  and 

1)  "The  rebellion  of  Korah  and  heads.     The  case  is  plain  enough,  it 

his  company,"  says  Mr.  Percival  and  was  the  Levites  and  the  people  rebel- 

the    whole    high-church    party,     (see  ling  against  the  priests  ;  and  not  the 

Powell  on  Ap.  Succ.  p.  301 ,)  "  is  anal-  priests  against  the  high  priest." 

ogous  to  the    rebellion  of  presbyters  "  Mr.  Percival  is  certainly  outwitted 

against      bishops.       Indeed  I        Now  in  attempting  to  make  friends  for  the 

who    were    Korah    and    his    compa-  high-church  in  the  cases  of  Jeroboam 

ny  .'     Who?     Who.?     Yes,  Mr.   Per-  and  the  seven  sons  of  Sceva.     Where 

cival,    were   THEY  priests    or    lay-  can    the    parallel    for    the    former    be 

men.?  What  does  this  mean — 'Seek  found    but   in    heresy,   the    head  and 

ye    the    priesthood    also  ?  '      If    they  fountain   of  whatever  prelatical    suc- 

werc  p7-i'S^5,  how  could  they  seek  the  cession  high-church   has?     And  who 

priestliood .'  Dathan  and  Abiram  were  can   avoid    likening    the    latter,   who 

Reubenites,  and  could  not  be  priests,  were  sons  of  a  chief  of  the  priests,  and 

riieij  vom.  of  t/icm  loere  priests  at  all !  who  seem  to  have  resented  tlie  inter- 

Fie  !  fie  !  ye   queen's    chaplains    and  ference  of  the  heretic  and  schismatic 

Oxford    tractmen,  to  trifle   thus  with  Paul  with  their  peculiar  commission, 

the  public  mind !     But  your  violation  to  Mr.  Percival  et  id  omne   genus." 

of  truth  will  return  upon  your  own  (See  Powell,  p.  300.) 


140  THE    APOSTLES    CONDEMN    PRELACY.  [lECT.  VI. 

their  authoritative  requisitions,  to  be  followed  in  these  traditions 
of  the  elders,  (i.  e.  fathers,)  which  they  taught.'  Nor  were  the 
apostles  themselves  inattentive  to  these  divine  injunctions?  In- 
stead of  claiming  a  prelatic  authority  to  interpret  the  word  cf 
God,  and  thus  to  dictate  our  faith,  they  ware  careful  to  declare 
that,  although  employed  by  God  as  his  inspired  agents  to  com- 
municate his  will,  yQl,  iiersonally,  they  were  themselves  equal- 
ly bound  to  receive  it  with  the  very  humblest  of  their  followers. 
"  Not,"  says  Paul  to  the  Corinthians,  "  that  we  have  dominion 
over  your  faith,  but  are  helpers  of  your  faith,  for  by  faith  "  — as 
wrought  by  the  convincing  power  of  God's  spirit  in  your  own 
minds  —  "  ye  stand."  (2  Cor.  i.  24.)  "  For  we  preach  not  our- 
selves, but  Christ  Jesus  the  Lord  ;  and  ourselves  your  servants 
for  Jesus's  sake."  (2  Cor.  iv.  5.)  Therefore  does  the  apostle 
Peter  solemnly  call  upon  the  ministers  of  Christ,  with  whom  he 
identifies  himself,  saying,  "I,  who  am  also  a  presbyter"  —  to 
"  feed  the  flock  of  God,  taking  the  oversight  (or  episcopate)  of 
it,  "  not,"  says  he,  "  as  being  lords,"  (or  rulers,  or  claiming  the 
exercise  of  superior  and  lordly  functions)  "over  God's  heritage; 
but  "  contrariwise,  by  your  equality  and  brotherhood,  as  min- 
isters, '*  being  ensamples  to  the  flock."    1  Pet.  v.  1  -3.2 

But  still  further,  it  is  clearly  foretold  that  such  arrogant 
pretensions  to  higher  seats  in  the  house  of  the  Lord,  and  to 
superior  eminency,  would  be  made  in  the  coming  ages  of  the 
church  ;  and  that  they  must  be  earnestly  contended  against. 
For  instance,  there  are  some  spoken  of  (in  2  Cor.  xi.  12,)  who 
"transformed  themselves  into  apostles  of  Christ" — by  actually 
assuming  the  title,  and  claiming  a  succession  to  the  powers  and 
functions,  of  the  apostles  —  against  whom  the  apostle  denounces 
"  sharpness  according  to  the  power  which  the  Lord  had  given 
him."  (2  Cor.  xiii.  10.)  Thus  also  does  Paul,  in  his  last  solemn 
interview  with  the  Ephesian  ministers,  forewarn  them,  that  "  of 
THEIR  owNSELVEs"  —  evcn  among  those  who  were  ministers  of 
Christ  —  "shall  men  arise,  speaking  perverse  things  to  draw 
disciples  after  them."  These  prelatic  and  ambitious  aspirants 
after  power  and  official  pre-eminence,  he  calls  "  grievous  wolves" 
who  should  "  not  spare  the  flock,"  but  make  it  subservient  to  their 
own  aggrandizement.  (Acts  xx.  29  —  31.  So  also,  we  are 
taught,  in  connexion  with  the  mention  of  Diotrephes,  whom  Oe- 

1)  See  marginal  note  in  Bagster's  p.  151  and  note,)  then  how  very  poi.t- 
Comprehensive  Bible  in  Matt  23.  edly  does  it   prohibit  tliis  lord-hishnp- 

2)  If  we  understand  this  passage  ing  over  tiie  clergy,  by  these  self-styl- 
ofthe  apostle  as  prelatists  would  have  ed  successors  of  tiie  apostles,  who  thus 
us,  and  as  the  Vulgate  renders  it,  contradict  the  precept  of  their  exem- 
"  neither  as  being  lords  over  God's  plarsinthe  plainest  possible  manner, 
olergy/'    (eee  Saravia  o«  Priesthood, 


LECT.  VI.]  THE    APOSTLES    CONDEMN    PRELACY.  141 

cumenius,  Bede,  and  some  others,  think  to  have  been  in  the  min- 
istry. Whatever  he  was,  his  course  is  plainly  stated,  and  ils  rep- 
robation as  plainly  expressed.  He  "loved  to  have  the  pre-em- 
inence." The  original  word  is  Cp/AoTr^wTfuwv  that  is,  one  "  who 
loveih  the  presidency  or  chief  place,  and  who  therefore  magnified 
himself  in  his  office,  and  behaved  haughtily  in  it'" — just  like 
these  prelates  who  "prate  against  us,"  their  ministerial  brethren, 
"  with  malicious  words  :  "  and  not  content  therewith,  neither  do 
themselves'*  receive"  us  as"  the  brethren,"  but  "  forbid  them" — 
that  is,  their  more  evangelic  brethren  —  "  that  would  ;  and  cast 
them  out  of  the  church"  —  calling  them  Socinians,  and  rational- 
ists, and  venturing  to  make  ternis  of  communion  for  the  church 
of  God  which  he  never  framed.  Surely  to  such,  the  language 
of  our  Saviour  is  as  applicable,  as  to  the  more  ancient  —  and 
therefore,  in  their  view,  more  catholic  —  fathers  ;  "  woe  unto  you 
scribes  and  pharisees,"  prelates,  "  for  ye  shut  up  the  kingdom  of 
heaven  against  men"  —  by  these  unauthorized  doctrines  and 
terms  of  communion  —  "  neither  suffer  ye  them  that  are  entering 
to  go  in."     (Matt,  xxiii.  13.) 

The  apostle  Jude,  also,  tells  us  of  some  in  his  time,  whose 
"mouth  spoke  great  swelling  words,  having  men's  persons  in 
admiration,  because  of  advantage"  —  men  who  "despised  the 
dominion" — and  supreme  authority  of  God's  holy  word — "and 
spoke  evil  of  dignities" — by  denying  to  other  ministers  the  equal 
prerogatives  assigned  to  them  "  by  heaven."  "  These  be  they," 
says  the  apostle  "  who  separate  themselves" — from  their  brethren 
and  claim  to  be  the  only  true  church  and  the  only  true  ministers, 
and  to  have  the  only  true  ordinances  of  Christ,  (Jude  v.  8,  16, 
19,)  —  and  who  "  murmur  and  complain"  that  any  otiiers  should 
be  received  and  acknowledged  as  such ;  and  that  God  should  so 
abundantly  bless  their  labors. 

Indeed,  the  very  last  book  in  the  Bible  is  chiefly  occupied,  in 
depicting  the  misery  and  ruin,  the  spiritual  tyranny  and  wicked- 
ness, and  the  abominations,  which  should  be  foisted  into  God's 
worship  and  held  forth  as  his  doctrines,  by  those  wearing  the  garb 
of  the  ministry.  Of  these  persons  it  is  in  so  many  words  revealed, 
that  they  should  lay  claim  to  this  very  character  of  being  suc- 
cessors of  the  apostles  and  invested  with  their  personal  and  spir- 
itual authority.  And  it  is  here  made  our  imperative  duty  to 
"  try  them  who"  thus  arrogantly  "  say  thky  are  apostles  and 
ARE  NOT ;"  in  the  certain  assurance  that  we  shall  find  their  cre- 
dentials utterly  vain  and  false.  (Rev.  ii.  2.)  "  One  would  have 
thought,"  to  appropriate  the  language  of  Mr.  Percival — "that 
the  sentence  concerning  certain  false  teachers  "whom  I  have 

1)  B^  Bagster*8  Comprehensive  BiW«,  marginal  note. 


142  1*0   COMMISSION   FOR    PRELATES.  [LECt.  VI. 

delivered  unto  Satan,  that  they  m&y  learn  not  to  blaspheme,"  — 
( 1  Tim.  i.  20,)  had  been  sufficient  to  appal  these  prelaiic  succes- 
sionisls  when  they  venture  actually  to  deny  the  Holy  One  and 
the  Just,  the  privilege  or  the  right  of  having  any  other  church 
than  among  themselves.  "But  thus  it  is  that  one  evil  step 
draws  another ;  they  who  began  by  carping  at  the  authority  of" 
presbyters,  "  presently  proceeded  further  to  carp  at  that  of  the 
apostles,"  and  to  frame  apostolical  canons,  rites,  ceremonies,  or- 
ders, and  traditions  of  their  own  devising,  "  and  who  will  not 
probably  be  deterred  from  carping  at  that  of  our  Lord  himself."^ 

For  what  else  is  it,  after  such  solemn  rebukes  of  the  very 
spirit  of  prelacy  by  our  Lord  himself — after  finding  that  the  same 
names,  qualifications  and  duties  are  given,  in  his  word,  to  all  his 
ministers;  and  that,  in  all  the  apostolic  churches,  instead  of  prel- 
acy, there  was  to  be  found  presbytery  ;  and  instead  of  different 
orders,  ministerial  equality  —  what  else,  I  say,  is  it  than  carping 
at  the  Lord  himself — to  set  at  defiance  his  teaching,  and  the  ex- 
ample of  all  the  apostolic  churches  —  by  the  obstinate  intrusion, 
as  of  divine  right,  of  this  system  of  prelacy  ? 

This  doctrine  will  be  found  unsupported  by  the  word  of  God, 
if  we  proceed  to  consider  the  nature  of  that  ministerial  commis- 
sion, under  which  all  who  labor  in  word  and  doctrine,  must  claim 
their  authority. 

There  is  but  one  commission  given  by  Christ,  and  by  virtue 
of  which,  ministers  claim  authority  to  teach,  and  are  impelled  to 
undertake  the  difficult  and  laborious  office  of  the  minister. 
For,  however  Christ  may  have  commissioned  the  twelve  and  the 
seventy  also,  for  a  temporary  agency,  in  delivering  a  definite,  and 
limited,  and  preparatory  message;  it  was  only  when  he  had  ac- 
tually founded  the  christian  church,  and  was  about  to  ascend,  as 
its  head,  to  the  supremacy  of  his  mediatorial  throne,  that  he 
gave  that  perpetual  commission,  which  was  to  remain  in  force  to 
the  end  of  the  world.*  This  is  the  well-head  of  all  ministerial 
Older,  power,  and  dignity.  Here  the  Divine  Legislator  of  his 
church,  looking  from  the  heights  of  his  ascending  glory,  upon 
its  coming  fortunes,  has  expressed  his  will,  as  to  the  character 

1)  See  Ancient  Christ'y.  vol.   i.      ford,  vol.  i.   pp.  123   and  153,  where 
pp.  405,  407,  420,  422,  423,  424,  425,      these  views  are  fully  avowed. 
426.435,430,455,457.  "The  third    ordination,"  says   the 

That  these  principles  are  contrary  to  Rev  Mr.  Pratt,  (Old  Paths,  p.  59,) 
the  spirit  of  the  New  Testament,  see  '•  of  the  apostles,  when  they  were  in- 
shown  in  Unity  and  Schism,  pp.  121,  vested  witli  all  power  and  authority  to 
122,  and  Presb.  Def,  pp.  40,41.  act  in  Christ's  stead,  and  to  bind  and 

2)  See  Rise  and  PrOjjressof  Chris*  loose  in  his  r.hurch,  took  place  after 
tianity,  by  the  Riv.  S.  Hinds  of  Ox-  our  blessed  Lord's  resurrection,  and 

immediettely  before  his  ascension." 


LECT.  VI.] 


JJO    COMMISSION    rOR    PRELATES. 


143 


and  functions  of  its  officers.  And  will  it  be  pretended  that,  in 
this  only  formal  enunciation  of  the  ministerial  commission,  there 
is  either  an  allusion  to  three  orders,  or  to  prelates,  or  to  the  sep- 
arate functions  of  ordaining,  governing,  and  teaching  ?  Or  is 
the  commission  limited  by  its  own  express  terms,  to  prelates  and 
their  successors,  to  the  end  of  time?  There  is  but  one  com- 
mission ;  and  this  commission  addresses  itself,  in  broad  terms,  to 
all  the  ministers  of  Christ ;  lays  down  for  all,  one  and  the  same 
functions;  and  makes  to  them  all,  one  and  the  same  promise. 
There  is,  therefore,  and  there  can  be,  but  one  order  of  christian 
ministers,  by  whatever  name  they  may  be  called,  or  in  whatever 
way  their  functions  may  be  systematized  by  ecclesiastical  appoint- 
ment, or  their  talents  and  services  appropriated  by  ecclesiasti- 
cal authority.  Let  then  prelates  show  some  divine  commission 
by  which  their  order  is  separately  instituted.  Let  them,  who 
claim  the  exclusive  enjoyment  of  Christ's  gifts,  show  the  testa- 
ment that  disinherits  their  brethren,  and  in  which  the  common 
Saviour  of  all  has  disowned  a  portion  of  his  own  commissioned 
servants.'     For  it  is  not  to  be  imagined  that  any  act  emanating 


1)  See  this  subject  more  fully 
considered  in  the  proposed  volume. 

That  this  commission  was  re- 
ally intended  to  authorize  and  apply 
to  presbyters,  we  are  most  certninly 
assured  by  the  reformers  of  the  Eng- 
lish church,  who  actually  embodied  it 
in  tlie  form  of  ordination  for  presby- 
ters. It  was  thus  appropriated  to 
presbyters  alone,  and  by  the  English 
church  herself,  which  continued  that 
form  until  the  year  1661,  when  dis- 
tinct forms  for  the  ordination  of  pres- 
byters and  bishops  were  first  intro- 
duced. 

"  It  is  admitted  on  all  hands,"  says 
Dr.  Bowden,  (Works  on  Epis.  vol.  ii. 
p.  142.)  "that  this  promise  implies  a 
continuation  of  the  gospel  ministry  to 
the  end  of  time,  and  that  the  commis- 
Bion  empowered  the  apostles  to  preach, 
to  administer  the  sacraments,  to  gov- 
ern the  church,  and  to  ordain  others 
to  the  same  holy  office." 

"  The  truth  of  the  proposition,"  says 
Dr.  Cooke  in  his  Essay  on  the  In- 
validity of  Presbyterian  Ordination, 
(Works  on  Episc.  vol.  ii.  p.  202,)  "  is 

S ranted.  It  is  true  that  Christ  gave 
ut  one  commission  for  the  office  of 
the  gospel  ministry  :  but  the  inference 
is  denied  ;  it  is  not  true  that  the  office 
of  course  is  one." 

"  It  may   be  as  well    proved  from 


thence,"  says  Dr.  Bowden,  (Works  on 
Episc.  vol.  i.  p.  173,)  "  that  all  eccle- 
siastical teachers  had,  in  the  first  age, 
the  powers  of  the  apostles,  as  they 
have  since,  the  powers  of  bishops, 
properly  so  called.     For  there  is  no 

DIFFERENCE  AT  ALL  MADE  in  THE 
COMMISSION.'' 

Now  this  conclusion  we  think  inev- 
itable and  fair,  on  the  principle  that 
"  ubi  lex  non  distinguit  non  est  dis- 
tinguendum."  And  that  we  are  not 
bad  reasoners,  let  an  English  prelate 
testify.  "  Truly,"  saj's  B.shop  Croft  in 
his  True  State  of  the  Church,  (Scott's 
Coll.  of  Tr.  vol.  vii  p.  300,)  '•  I  must 
commend  Petavius,  if  he  will  thus  in- 
geniously confess  the  truth,  for  I  shall 
by  and  by  fully  declare  that  't  is  the 
diversity  of  commission,  and  not  of 
order,  that  enables  men  to  act  diverse- 
ly, and  that  a  bishop  without  commis- 
sion can  do  no  more  than  a  presbyter 
without  commission  ;  and  therefore  I 
further  beg  of  Petavius,  that,  till  he 
can  prove  the  contrary,  he  would  con- 
fess them  also  to  be  of  one  single  or- 
der, called  only  by  divers  names, 
priest,  or  bishop,  and  one  chosen  out 
of  the  number,  not  the  rest  abased, 
but  he  exalted,  with  authority  to  gov- 
ern. This  is  the  rational  and  com- 
mon practice  of  all  societies,  corpora- 
tions, colleges,  monasteries,  conclave 


144  PRELACY    CONTRARY    TO    THE    PROMISES.  [jLECT.    VI. 

from  men,  from  sinful  creatures  like  ourselves,  should  be  of  force 
to  convey  such  an  awful  power,^  wrapped  up,  as  it  is,  in  such 
terrible  mystery.  "  Clearly  not — no  command  of  an  earthly 
king,  nor  ordinance  of  an  earthly  les;islature,  nor  decrees  of 
counsels,  nor  authority  of  fathers,"  could  invest  an  order  of  men 
with  power  over  the  gifts  of  the  Holy  Ghost.'^  "  He  alone,"  it 
is  confessed,  "  is  evidently  entitled  to  confer  this  power,  who 
himself  gave,  in  the  first  instance,  that  Spirit  to  his  church.  It 
is  to  him  such  commission  must  be  traced,  in  the  case  of  every 
individual  who  would  establish  his  right  to  this"  dread  suprem- 
acy.^ 

Nor  is  this  doctrine  less  opposed  to  the  promises  of  scripture. 
Christ  promised  to  be  himself  always  with  his  ministers  to  the 
end  of  the  world.  All  power  is  his,  and  with  him,  and  by  him, 
and  through  him;  so  that,  without  him  there  is  neither  power 
nor  gifts  in  his  church.  Now  where,  in  all  the  Bible,  does  Christ 
say  he  will  be  only  with  prelates?  Where  does  he  say  he  will 
impart  these  sacred  gifts  only  by  and  through  prelates,  and  by 
the  imposition  of  their  talismanic  hands  ?  And  where  does  he 
say  that  he  has  left  these  gifts,  in  some  way  of  unintelligible  and 
inscrutable  mystery,  to  be  carried  down,  upon  the  equally  undis- 
coverable,  indescribable  stream  of  apostolic  succession  ?  We 
ask  where  ?  That  this  promise  of  Christ,  which  is  bound  up 
with  the  ministerial  commission,  in  particular  —  and  that  his 
promises  to  his  church  generally,  —  are  not  so  limited,  but  are 
made  in  their  fulness  to  all  his  ministers,  and  to  all  the  members 
of  his  body,  the  church  —  whether  admitted  through  the  door  of 
prelacy  or  of  presbytery  —  is  in  itself  clear  to  every  candid  ex- 

of  cardinals,  and  what  not :  t.here  is  no  was   praepositus    only,    one    of    them 

new  order  supposed  in   any  of  these,  placed  with   authority  over  them,  no 

but  only  a  new  election,  and  a  new  more;  nor  doth  the  name  of  bishop,  in 

authority  given  according  to  the    fun-  the  original  Greek,  signify  any  more 

damental  constitulion  of  eacli  society,  than  the  overseer  sfthe  rest." 
The    pope    himself,    with    his    triple  1)  See  Oxf.    Tracts,  vol.  i.  p.  30. 

crown    and  triple    dominion  over   all  "  The  awfulness  of  the  priestly  office." 

patriarchs,  archbishops,  and   bishops,  Tr.  100  of  the  Prot.  Episc.  Tr.  Soc.  p. 

pretends   to   have    no   new    order    of  12. 

popeship,  but  only  the  new  authority  2)  "  Again,"  says  Mr.  Baynes, 
conferred  by  his  election:  why  then,  (Diocesan's  Tryall,  pp.  71,  72,)  '•  God 
may  not  presbyters,  chosen  to  preside  hath  described  the  presbyter's  office, 
over  the  rest,  without  any  new  order,  as  amply  as  any  other.  A  legate  de- 
do  the  like  .'  And  for  this  very  rea-  pendeth  on  none  for  instructions,  but 
son  I  conceive  Justin  Martyr  uses  the  on  him  that  sendeth  him  ;  now  every 
name  of  president  always  for  bishop ;  minister  is  an  embassador  of  Christ, 
and  St.  Cyprian,  also  a  bishop  himself,  Uy  their  reason  a  minister  should  be 
and  most  glorious  martyr,  he  calls  accountant  to  man  for  what  he  did  in 
himself  and  other  bishops  generally  his  ministry,  if  his  exercising  of  it  did 
by  the  name  of  prospositus,  as  if  this  depend  on  man." 
were  the  main  distinction  betwixt  3)  See  also  Oxf  Tr.  vol.  i.  p.  30. 
himself  and  his   presbyters,  that   he 


LECT.  VI.]  THE    PROMISES    VERSOS    PRELACY.  145 

aminer ;  and  may  be  abundantly  established  by  the  authority  of 
episcopalians  themselves.  These  promises  build  the  church  on 
the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus;  and  not  on  apostolic  succession.* 
They  refer  all  spiritual  and  saving  gifts  to  Christ,  as  their  only 
and  immediate  source  ;  and  not  to  the  mysterious  agency  of  an 
intermediate  apostolical  descent.  The  apostle,  therefore,  dis- 
claimed all  authority  over  the  faith  of  the  churches;  while  these 
boasting  successors  base  all  their  pretensions  on  their  authoritt/ — 
and  yet  call  themselves  successors  of  the  apostles.  These  prom- 
ises being  left  to  the  church,  and  to  all  believers^ — by  what  logic 
is  it  proved  that  prelates  are,  and,  of  right  constitute,  the  church  ? 
And  if  they  are  to  be  limited  to  the  clergy,  or  even  to  prelates, 
then  in  what  sense  are  they  true  of  those  —  and  they  are  not  a 
few  —  who  have  been,  to  use  the  words  of  one  of  their  own- 
selves,"  "  drunkards,  whoremongers,  adulterers,  dogs,  enchanters, 
and  the  many  who  died,  such  as  God's  word  hath  excluded  from 
the  kingdom  of  heaven,  and  whom  hell  must  swallow  up  with  open 
mouth  .''  "  "  Are  they  " — we  ask  with  this  most  vaunted  divine, 
"  THE  CHURCH,  and  may  hell  gates  prevail  against  them  and  not 
prevail  against  the  church  ?  "*  Does  the  Holy  Spirit  pass  in  suc- 
cession, in  the  plenitude  of  episcopal  grace,  through  those  who 
resembled  the  archbishop  mentioned  by  this  writer,  who  gave  ev- 
idence that  he  was  passing  straight  to  hell  as  duke,  while  he  was 
most  canonical  in  his  archiepiscopal  descent?®  And  if  so,  then 
what  kind  of  grace  is  that  which  can  thus  transmit  itself  unpol- 
luted through  the  foulest  channels  ?  It  is,  as  the  apostle  says, 
(1  Cor.  viii.  4)  "  nihil  in  mundo.'"^ 

Besides,  when  they  thus  limit  the  promises  of  God  to  the 
church,  as  one;  and  in  her  prelatical  form;  seeing  that  the 
church  is,  in  fact,  not  now  one,  even  in  her  prelatical  phase,  but 

1)  See  Oxf.  Tr.  vol.  i.  p.  159.  no  respecter  of  persons,  are  infallibly 

2)  Ibid,  p.  160.  entailed    to    a   certain    succession    of 

3)  See  Jackson's  Wks    fol.   vol.  men,  without  all  respect  of  learning, 
.   p.  437.  wit,  or  honesty.    You  must  prove  that 

4)  Jackson's  Wks.  vol.  i.  p.  425.  the  Holy  Spirit  is  a  private  spirit,  and 

5)  Jackson's  Wks.  vol.  i.  p.  425.       might  err   when   he    said    '  the   Lord 
G)   See  Ibid,  pp.  426,  427.     That      giveth  grace  to  the  humble  ;'  and  that 

is  "  nothing  in  the  world."  our   Saviour's    words    '  ventus  spiral 

To   appropriate    these    promises    of  ubi  vult,'  did  not  import  (as  he  meant) 

God  —  the  rich  treasures  of  heavenly  that  his  Spirit  might  enlighten  whom 

grace  and  the  glorious  inheritance  of  he  pleased.     For  if  all  these  and  that 

liis  spirilual  commonwealth,  wherever  other    '  Deus    cujus   vult   miseretur,' 

found,  in  any    of  its    members,  —  to  then  who  can  hinder  God,"  &c.  "That 

prelates  '■  you  must   prove,"  says  Dr.  men  should  learn  to  rely  on  his  mer- 

Jackson,   whom  they  themselves  de-  cy   and    providence    and    not   on    the 

nominate  one  of  the   greatest  divines,  authority  and  skill  of  men." 
and  who  was  a  president  in  Oxford,  7)  See  Jackson's  Wks.  fol.  vol.  i. 

"  that  the  best  gifts  of  God,  the  pecu-  p.  302. 
liar  attribute  of  whose  glory  it  is  to  be 

19 


146  THE    PROMISES   VERSUS    PRELACY.  [LECT.  VI. 

is  divided  into  parties,  who  mutually  excommunicate  one  the 
other,  and  demonstrate  the  invalidity  of  each  others'  claims; 
they  therefore  cut  off  all  possible  communication  with  heaven, 
since  this  condition  of  the  promise  has,  of  a  long  period,  yea, 
even  for  ages  past,  been  notoriously  broken  and  set  at  naught.' 

And  further,  on  this  part  of  our  subject ; — to  appropriate  tiiese 
promises  to  the  prelates  or  bishops  of  the  church  ;  as  the  source 
of  all  spiritual  gifts,  to  the  clergy  ;  and  thence  to  the  laity;  is  to 
render  the  spiritual  presence  of  Christ  with  the  clergy  essential  to 
the  perpetuity  of  the  church.  Without  this  presence  with  each 
and  every  one  of  the  successors,  in  the  line  of  apostolical  descent, 
the  promises  are  falsified,  the  succession  interrupted,  and  the 
current  of  vital  influences  impeded.  Now  will  any  sane-minded 
christian  man  unblushingly  affirm,  that  Christ  has  been  so 
present  with  all,  who  must  be  enrolled  in  the  black  list  of  vile 
apostate  successors  of  apostles  ?  And,  if  any  are  bold  enough 
to  make  such  an  affirmation,  are  they  ready  to  give  the  proof  of 
it  ?  For  surely  they  will  not  first  demand  infallibility  in  giving 
us  a  correct  interpretation  of  the  promise,  and  then  make  the 
promise  guarantee  the  certainty  of  that  which  is  most  uncertain, 
and  palpably  impossible.^ 

We  are  aware  that  it  is  urged,  that  this  uninterrupted  succes- 
sion is  made  certain  by  the  immutable  promises  of  Christ,  and 
therefore,  whatever  obscurity  may  attend  its  progress,  we  are 
required  to  believe  implicitly  in  its  certain  and  valid  continuance. 
This  argument  might  have  some  force,  were  it  only  proved  that 
there  is  in  the  word  of  God  any  such  promise,  securing  any  such 
result.  This,  however,  we  deny.  And  therefore,  to  insist  upon 
this  argument  is  only  another  application  by  "the  daughter,"  of 
a  course  of  reasoning  very  agreeable  to  "  her  mother."  The  pre- 
latical  Church  of  England  is  the  true  church,  because  she  alone 
retains  the  apostolical  succession,  and  that  she  does  retain  this 
succession  is  undeniable,  because  she  is  the  true  church,  and  must 
therefore  have  it. 

We  are  not  by  any  means  to  imagine,  that  the  promises  of 
Christ  secure  to  the  church  an  unfailing  possession  of  pure  and 
incorrupt  doctrine.  On  the  contrary,  the  most  grievous  errors 
in  doctrine  and  practice  have  been,  as  is  allowed,  permitted  to 
corrupt  the  church.^  Are  we,  then,  to  seek  the  fulfilment  of 
these  promises,  in   the  preservation  of  an  unbroken  succession 

1)  See  Newman  on  Romanism,  p.  vin  Instit.  vol.  ii.  pp.  313,  317,321, 
246.  London  ed.     Also,  Faber's    Alblgen- 

2)  See  this  granted  by  Faber  in      ses,  p.  15,  and  Hooker  in  ibid. 

his  Albigenses  p.  27.  3)  See   Oxf.  Tr.  No.  30,  35,  &c. 

See  on  this  subject  generally,  Cal- 


LECT.  VI. j  THE    PROMISES    VERSUS    PRELACY.  147 

of  prelaticaliy  ordained  ministers?  But  this  can  be  no  mark 
by  which  to  discover  the  real  nature  and  intention  of  that  com- 
mission, under  which  the  christian  church  holds  its  being.  The 
very  question  at  issue  is,  whether  Christ  or  his  apostles  have 
chartered  such  a  prelatical  corporation,  for  until  this  is  proved, 
it  is  in  vain  to  appeal  to  promises  which  have  reference  to  the 
church  universal,  and  not  to  an  order  of  self-constituted  dignita- 
ries. The  mere  fact  of  a  succession  of  such  men,  can  never  give 
them  a  divine  right  to  the  privileges  they  claim.  Until  such  a 
charter  is  produced,  from  Him  v^hose  sole  prerogative  it  is  to 
grant  it,  all  such  assumed  powers  must  be  regarded  as  self-orig- 
inated and  usurped. 

Besides,  if  these  promises  of  Christ  are  to  be  so  interpreted 
as  that  the  only  true  church,  is  that,  which  continues  to  pre- 
serve this  uninterrupted  succession;  then,  as  these  promises  run 
on  to  the  very  end  of  time,  it  cannot  be  certainly  determined, 
until  the  end  comes,  to  which,  of  all  the  churches  who  have 
claimed  them,  these  promises  really  belong.  For  many  churches, 
which  were  certainly  of  apostolic  origin,  and  which  prelatists  as- 
sert, were  prelaticaliy  organized,  (as,  for  instance,  some  of  the 
seven  churches  of  Asia,)  have  now  ceased  to  exist.  They  have 
not  continued  in  any  form  whatever.  Either,  therefore,  these 
promises  do  not  necessarily  imply  that  every  true  church,  when 
once  constituted,  would  continue  to  enjoy  this  prelatical  suc- 
cession, or  the  promises  have  failed  in  their  accomplishment  ; 
and  it  is  now  an  impossibility  to  find  any  true  church  by  this 
mark,  until  the  consummation  of  all  things.  Then,  and  not  till 
then,  can  this  interpretation  of  the  promises  be  urged  as  the 
ground  of  their  claims,  by  any  of  the  churches  that  may  have 
existed  in  the  course  of  time.  It  is,  therefore,  very  reasonable 
to  conclude,  that  such  never  was  the  intention  of  their  divine 
Author  in  giving  these  promises  to  his  church  and  people. 

Will  it  be  urged  upon  us  impatiently,  that  the  prelatic  inter- 
pretation of  these  promises  is  sustained  by  the  authority  of  the 
church  in  all  ages,  and  must,  therefore,  be  received,  whatever 
seeming  difficulties  may  attend  it,  in  the  opinion  of  self-consti- 
tuted judges  ?  We  must  be  permitted  to  reply,  that  it  is  utterly 
in  vain  to  tell  us  that  the  prelates  themselves  —  for,  after  all, 
this  is  what  is  meant  in  this  question  by  the  church  —  have 
affixed  such  an  interpretation  to  these  promises  of  the  word  of 
God,  (supposing  now  that  the  assertion  is  true.)  —  since  the  very 
question  in  debate  is,  whether  they  interpret  lightly.  Their 
right  of  interpretation  must  not  surely  be  assumed,  when  the 
very  thing   which   they    invite   us    to   discuss  is,  whether  they 


148  THE    PROMISES    VERSUS    PRELACY.  [LECT.  VI. 

possess  any  such  power."  That  they  have  any  such  power, 
we  deny,  and  we  will  hardly  be  convinced  by  their  assertion, 
that  they  have  ;  and  much  less  by  their  accompaniments  of 
anathemas  and  excommunications.  "  Never  cease,"  says  the 
Hon.  and  Rev.  Mr.  Noel,  "  to  ask  for  plain  and  positive  scrip- 
ture proof,  from  scripture,  that  a  Roman  catholic  council,"  (we 
say,  that  a  number  of  prelates,  called  the  church,)  "  composed 
of  a  small  part  of  the  clergy,  themselves  a  small  part  of  the 
whole  body,  the  pious  persons,  among  whom  are  a  small  part 
of  Christ's  universal  church;  that  this  small  fraction  effractions 
in  the  church,  distinguished  neither  for  piety  nor  learning,  is 
thus  gifted"  by  the  Lord,  with  such  an  absolute  supremacy 
over  his  own  inspired  word.^ 

Even,  however,  were  this  exclusive  power  admitted,  our  right 
to  investigate  its  extent,  and  to  test  its  claims,  as  these  are  pre- 
sented by  Christ  in  his  word,  must  still  remain  ;  and  our  right 
also  to  weigh  the  grounds  of  their  interpretations,  and  to  question 
their  interpretations  themselves.  For  any  body  of  men  "  to  de- 
cide who  are,  or  are  not,  partakers  of  the  benefits  of  the  chris- 
tian covenant,  and  to  prescribe  to  one's  fellow-mortals,  as  the 
terms  of  salvation,  the  implicit  adoption  of  their  own  interpreta- 
tions, is  a  most  fearful  presumption  in  men  not  producing  mirac- 
ulous proofs  of  an  immediate  divine  mission."^ 

1)  See  the  Hon  and  Rev.  B.  W.     to  the  Christian  Faith,  Lond.  1839,  p. 
Noel,  in  Romanists  and    Protestants,    230. 

p.  10.  See  this  also  fully  argued  by  Bishop 

See  also  Bishop  Hoadly's  celebrated  Davenant    in   his   Letter  to    DurjBus 

sermon  before  George  1  ,  on  the  nature  "  De  pace  inter  Evangelicos  Eccl.  res- 

of  the  kingdom  of  Clirist.  taurandam   adhortatio,"    Lond.   1640, 

2)  Archbp.  Whateley's  Dangers  pp.  10-15,  30,  35,  et  passim. 


ADDITIONAL  NOTES  TO  LECTURE  SIXTH. 


VARIATIONS    OF   PRELACy,   OR,    LEiRNED    EPISCOPAL    DOCTORS    VERSUS 
JURE    DIVINO    PRELATISTS. 

We  shall  here  illustrate  this  disunion  in  the  unity  of  this  prelatic  bodj,  by 
a  reference  to  a  few  particulars. 

I.     On  the  ofRce  of  the  apostles,  and  whether  they  had  any  successors. 

Until  Christ's  death,  the  apostles  were  presbyters,  and  Christ  alone  was 
bishop. 

1.  This  is  affirmed  by  Stillingfleetjirenicum,  Part  2,  p.  218.  Spanheim  Op. 
Theol.  Part  1,  p.  43G,  in  Ayton's  Constit.  of  the  Ch.  p.  18  Dr.  Hammond's 
Wks,  vol.  4,  p.  781,  who  makes  them  deacons.  Mr.  Brett,  Divine  Right  Epis- 
cop.  Lect.  8,  p.  17. 

2.  This  is  contradicted,  and  the  apostles  made  bishops  during  the  same  time, 
by  Bishop  Jer.  Taylor,  Episcop.  Asserted  ;  Dr.  Scott,  in  Christian  Life,  vol.  'A, 
p.  338;  Dr.  Monro's  Inq.  into  the  New  Opinions,  p.  96;  Mr  Rhind,  Apol.  p.  50 
&c.  ;  Willet,  Synopsis  Papismi,  p.  236;  Archbishojt  of  Spalato,  in  Ayton's 
Constit.  of  the  Ch.  Append,  p.  7  ;  Jeremy  Taylor,  (bishop,)  Wks.  vol.  7,  p.  7, 
&c.  who  contradicts  himself  in  Wks  vol.  13,  p.  19,  et.  seq. 

Archbishop  Laud  is  very  positive  in  affirming  that  Christ  chose  the  twelve, 
and  made  them  bishops  over  the  presbyters,  (Laud  on  the  Lit  and  Episcop. 
p.  195,)  and  Bishop  Beveridge  is  as  confident  that  Christ  chose  these  same 
twelve  as  presbyters  and  not  bishops.  (Wks.  vol.  2,  p.  ]12)  Again  Laud 
asserts  very  positively,  that  Christ  ordained  them,  since  the  word  used  by  St. 
Mark  is  iTroina-ev.  He  made  them.  (Ibid,  p.  196.)  Beveridge  on  the  contrary 
declares  that  Christ  did  not  ordain  any  of  them  during  his  life,  and  adduces 
in  proof,  the  use  of  this  very  term  vrotiKTi  J'aJ'iKu..     (Ibid,  vol.  2,  p.  112. 

3.  Others,  again,  affirm  that  the  apostles  were  not  commissioned  till  after 
Christ's  resurrection.  Mr.  Sage,  quoted  in  Ayton's  Constit.  of  Ch.  App  p  5, 6 ; 
Saravia's  Priesthood,  Spanheim  Op.  Theol.  Par.  1,436.  Stillingfleet  Irenic. 
p.  117, 118,  and  Par.  2,  218;  Whitby  Annot.  Luke  10,  1  ;  Dr.  Hammond  in 
Ibid  ;  Bellarmine  de  Pontif  lib.  4,  cap.  25;  Bishop  Heber  in  Life  of  Jeremy 
Taylor,  Wks.  vol.  1,  p.  185. 

II.  The  apostles  were  extraordinary  officers,  and  could  have  no  successors. 

1.  This  is  affirmed  by  Pearson  on  the  Creed,  p.  16,  "  who  are  continued  to 
us  only  in  their  writings;"  Whitby  in  Comment.  Pref  to  Titus;  Bishop 
Hoadly,  see  Wks.  fol.  vol.  2,  p.  827;  Dr.  Barrow  in  Wks.  fol.  vol.  1,  p.  598; 
Dr.  Willet  in  Synopsis  Papismi.  fol.  p.  164,  165  ;  Bishop  Fell  on  Ephes.  5,  9 ; 
Hooker  Eccl.  Pol.  B.  vii.  §  4,  vol.  3,  p.  187,  Keble's  edition ;  Sadeel ;  Chil- 
lingworth  ;  Hinds'  Hist,  of  Rise  and  Progress  of  Christ,  vol.  2,  p.  70 — 87; 
Hinds  on  Inspiration,  p.117  ;  Lightfoofs  Wks.  vol.  13,  pp.  26, 27, 30, 70,  98,  &c. 
and  in  other  works  ;  Palmer  on  the  Ch.  vol.  1,  p.  169,  170;  Bowers'  Hist,  of 
the  Popes,  vol.  i.  5,  6 ;  Potter  on  Ch.  Govt.  pp.  121,  117,  Am.  ed.;  Steele's 
Phil,  of  the  Evid.  of  Christ,  pp.  102,  105,  106,  107;  Dodwell  Parones,  ad.  ext. 
p.  68,  comp.  11,54,  55,  62,  apud  Ayton;   Bishop  Davenant  on  Col.  vol.  i. 


150  NOTES    TO    LECTURE    VI. 

Ch.  1  ;  Mr.  Brett,  Div.  Right  of  Episcop.  Lect.  xii.  p.  26,  apud  Ayton  ;  Stil- 
linfffleet,  (the  dean  and  not  the  bishop,)  Irenic.  Par.  ii.  pp.  299  —  301  ;  Span- 
hefm  Fil.  Dissert,  3  numb.  25,  37,  34 ;  Archbishop  Tiilotson,  see  quoted  in 
Presbyterianism  Defd.  pp.  117,  118. 

2.  This  is  most  resolutely  disproved  by  Laud.  See  his  Three  Speeches  on 
the  Liturgy  Episcop.  &c.  in  Oxf.  edit.  1840,  p.issim  ;  Dr.  William  Nichols  in 
his  Defence  of  the  Ch.  of  England  ;  "  Bishops  are  successors  to  the  Apostles, 
both  in  name  and  thing,"  says  Leslie  in  Letter  on  Episcopacy,  in  The  "Scholar 
Armed,  vol  i.  04,  et  alibi ;  Beveridge  in  Wks.  vol.  ii.  pp.  88,  93,  120,  147,  149, 
167.  278;  Law  in  his  Second  Letter  to  the  Bishop  of  Bangor  See,  in  Oxf.  Tr. 
vol  iii.  p- 156  ;  Stillingfleet,  (the  bishop,  not  the  dean,)  in  Wks.  vol.  i.  p.  371 ,  in 
Art.  Bishop.  Rees'  Cycloped. ;  Bishop  Hicks,  Mr.  Rhind,  Dr.  Scott,  Dr.  Mun- 
roe,  see  Ayton's  Orig.  Constit.  of  the  Ch.  App.  p.  8,  Lect.  ii. ;  Bishop  Hon- 
ieman,  Survey  of  Naphthali,  Par.  ii.  191,  &c.  in  Ayton;  Bishop  Hall;  Episc. 
by  Div.  Rights,  Par.  2. 

III.  The  divine  and  exclusive  right  of  three  essentially  distinct  orders  is 
clearly  established  in  scripture.     This  is  affirmed  by  prelatists  generally. 

That  there  were  only  two  distinct  orders,  is  affirmed  by  Bishop  White.  In 
closing  his  dissertation  of  episcopacy,  (Lect.  on  the  Catech.  &c.  Philad. 
1813,  p.  468,)  he  says,  "  In  the  discussion  of  this  subject,  the  author  has  con- 
fined himself  to  the  single  point  of  establishing  two  distinct  orders  of  the  min- 
istry :  resolved  into  one  order  by  many  bodies  of  professing  christians."  In 
the  episcopal  charge  delivered  by  this  same  writer  in  1834,  when  urging  the 
duty  of  sustaining  Ihe  episcopacy,  he  says  the  reformers  "  found  that  in  the 
origin  of  the  ministry,"  (The  Past  and  the  Future,  Philad.  1834,  p.  13.)  "it  com- 
prehended THREE  orders." 

As  to  this  third  order.  Bishop  White,  in  a  letter  to  Bishop  Hobart,  thus 
expresses  himself:  (see  in  Memoir  by  Dr.  Wilson,  p.  .365:)  "  But  can  it  be 
imao-ined  that  an  order  instituted  for  the  purpose  of  serving  tables,'  should  in 
the  very  infancy  of  its  existence  have  the  office  of  the  higher  order  of  the 
ministry  committed  to  them.'  I  do  not  deny  either  the  right  or  the  prudence 
of  allowing  what  has  been  subsequently  allowed  to  this  lowest  order  of  the 
clergy.  All  I  contend  for  is,  that  at  the  first  institution  of  the  order,  there 
could  have  been  no  difference  between  them  and  laymen,  in  regard  to  the 
preaching  of  the  word  and  the  administering  of  the  sacraments." 

As  to  deacons.  Bishop  Croft,  in  his  Naked  Truth,  thus  delivers  himself. 
(Scott's  Coll.  of  Tr.  vol.  vii.  pp.  307  and  308.)  "  Having  thus  stated  and 
united  the  two  pretended  and  distinct  orders  of  episcopacy  and  presbytery,  I 
now  proceed  to  the  third  pretended  spiritual  order,  that  of  deaconship. 
Whether  this  of  deaconship  be  properly  to  be  called  an  order  or  an  office,  I 
will  not  dispute  ;  but  certainly  no  spiritual  order,  for  their  office  was  to  serve 
tables,  as  the  scripture  phrases  it,  which  in  plain  English,  is  nothing  else  but 
overseers  of  the  poor,  to  distribute  justly  and  discreetly  the  alms  of  the  faith- 
ful :  which  the  apostles  would  not  trouble  themselves  withal,  lest  it  should 
hinder  them  in  the  ministration  of  the  woid  and  prayer.  But  as  most  matters 
of  this  world,  in  process  of  time,  deflect  much  from  the  original  constitution, 
so  it  fell  out  in  this  business  ;  for  the  bishops  who  pretended  to  be  succes- 
sors TO  THE  apostles,  by  little  and  little  took  to  themselves  the  dispensation 
of  alms,  first  b}^  way  of  inspection  over  the  deacons,  but  at  length  the  total  man- 
agenjent,  and  the  deacons  who  were  mere  lay-officers,  by  degrees  crept  into  the 
church  ministration,  and  became  a  reputed  spiritual  order,  and  a  necessary 
degree  and  step  to  the  priesthood,  of  which  I  can  find  nothing  in  scripture, 
and  tlie  original  institution,  not  a  word  relating  to  any  thing  but  the  ordering 
of  alms  for  the  poor.  And  the  first  I  find  of  their  officiating  in  spiritual  mat- 
ters, is  in  Justin  Martyr,  who  lived  in  the  second  century." 

That  there  was  only  one  essential  order  in  the  christian  ministry,  is  also 
affirmed. 

Jeremy  Taylor  says  there  is  "  only  one  order,"  and  that  bishops  are  the 
"  only  order,"  See  in  Powell  on  Ap.  Succ.  p.  17;  Palmer  on  the  Church, 
vol   ii. 

And  while  it  is  asserted  in  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  that  three  orders 
are  clear,  &c..  Hooker  shows  that  this  whole  subject  is  entirely  beyond  the 
reach  of  ordinary  men.     See  as  quoted  in  Lecture  iii.  p.  71. 


NOTES    TO    LECTURE    VI.  151 

That  this  was  also  the  opinion  of  a  large  portion  of  the  early  English 
church  was  made  apparent.     See  Lecture  iii.  p.  71. 

It  was  our  design  to  have  pursued  the  illustration  of  this  subject  to  a  much 
greater  length,  and  as  it  regards  various  other  points  of  disagreement.  We 
will  however  desist,  and  refer  the  reader  to  the  following  sources  of  informa- 
tion on  this  subject. 

Dr.  Mason's  Wks.  vol  iii.  pp.  71,  143,144,150;  Andersons's  Defence  of 
Presbyterian  Church  Government,  pp.  30,  31,  110;  Plea  for  Presbytery,  Glas- 
gow, 1840,  p.  290;  Dr.  Mitchell's  Letters  to  Bishop  Skinner,  p.  36,  «&c. ; 
Dr.  Ayton's  Constitution  of  tlie  Primitive  Church,  Appendix ;  Well's  Vindic. 
of  Presb.  Ordin.  p.  35  ;  also  The  Sum  of  the  Episcopal  Controversy,  &c.  by 
William  Jameson  ;  Lect.  of  History  in  the  University  of  Glasgow,  Glasg. 
1713,  pp.  78,  126,  in  the  Old  South  Church  Library 

And  now  we  may  fairly  say,  as  Dr.  Bowden  has  taught  us  to  say,  —  "  This 
makes  the  notion  ridiculous.  Pray  sirs  agree  among  yourselves,  and  then  you 
may  with  more  decency  contradict  us."     Wks.  on  Episc.  vol.  ii.  p.  127. 

NOTE  B. 

Thus  also  speaks  the  Hon.  and  Rev.  Baptist  W.  Noel :  "  This  "  (Matt,  xvi.) 
we  are  told,  (see  Romanists  and  Protestants,  p.  8,)  gives  to  the  church  its  au- 
thority, '  The  gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail  against  it ;'  and  limits  this  authority 
to  the  successors  of  Peter  in  the  Roman  church.  '  Thou  art  Peter,  and  on 
this  rock  will  I  build  my  church.'  To  the  second  of  these  conclusions  that  the 
Roman  church  is  intended,  a  man  of  plain  sense  might  demur  on  these  con- 
siderations : 

"  First,  That  the  rock  may  not  be  Peter,  but  that  doctrine  which  Peter  had 
just  before  professed,  —  the  divinity  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  on  which  the  universal 
church  is  unquestionably  built. 

"  Secondly,  That  if  the  church  is  built  on  Peter,  it  is  equally  built  on  the 
other  inspired  writers.  '  Ye  are  built,'  says  Paul,  '  on  the  foundation  of  the 
apostles  and  the  prophets.'     (Eph.  ii.  20.) 

"  Thirdly,  That,  in  point  of  fact,  several  churches,  as  those  of  Greece  and 
Macedonia,  were  built  on  Paul ;  having  no  more  connexion  (that  we  know 
of)  with  Peter  than  with  any  other  of  the  twelve  apostles. 

"  Fourthly,  That  it  is  very  improbable  that  Peter  was  ever  bishop  of  Rome, 
the  prevalent  tradition  being  that  he  was  bishop  of  Antioch. 

"  Fifthly,  That  though  Peter  be  allowed  (which  he  cannot)  to  have  been  the 
great  founder  of  the  universal  church,  there  is  no  mention  here  of  his  succes- 
sors at  Rome  ;  and  the  promise,  therefore,  if  it  belong  to  any  particular  visible 
church,  may  belong  to  his  Greek  successors,  rather  than  to  the  church  of 
Rome. 

"  And  now,  what  is  the  promise  itself,  whether  it  belong  to  the  Greek  or 
Roman  catholic  church  .'  Where  is  a  word  of  infallibility  ?  If  any  visible 
christian  church,  with  a  pure  faith  and  wholesome  discipline,  with  faithful 
pastors  and  pious  congregations,  maintains  its  ground  against  the  devil  and 
the  world  ;■  even  though  it  does  not  grow  in  numbers,  or  send  the  gospel  to 
the  heathen  ;  though  it  want  infallibility,  and  err  in  matters  of  subordinate 
importance  ;  yet  surely  it  has  not  yielded  to  the  gates  of  hell. 

"  But,  lastly.  Though  the  Greek  and  Roman  churches,  and  all  the  visible 
churches  of  nominal  christians,  with  the  greater  number  of  ecclesiastics  who 
preside  over  them,  should  degenerate  into  a  corrupt  practice  and  a  false  belief, 
still,  if  there  be  found  amongst  them  some  faithful  pastors,  through  wiiose 
ministry  a  few  real  christians  are  preserved  unharmed  by  the  plague  of  super- 
stition, to  maintain  the  doctrines  of  the  gospel  and  exhibit  its  morality,  then 
is  there  the  church  of  Christ  still  subsisting  ;  and  the  promise  still  holds  good  ; 
for  the  gates  of  hell  have  not  prevailed  against  it;  and  this  is  the  real  meaning 
of  the  promise." 


152  NOTES    TO    LECTURE    VI. 


NOTE  C. 


"It  is  certain,"  says  one,  "  that  those  who  ordained  others  in  the  primi 
tive  cliurch  were,  presbyters,  but  it  is  doubtful  whether  tiiey  were  bisliops. 
I  suppose  every  one  will  grant,  that  it  was  the  practice  i'roni  the  times  of  the 
apostles  for  ministers  to  ordain  ministers:  but  all  who  have  read  any  thing  of 
this  controversy,  know  that  it  is  disputed  whether  there  were,  in  the  first  ages 
of  the  church,  any  such  thing  as  bishops  in  the  modern  sense  of  the  word. 
N'lw  this  dispute  very  much  weakens  the  evidence  of  a  succession  in  a  line  of 
bishops,  but  does  not  at  all  affect  the  evidence  of  a  presbyterian  succession  ; 
for  these  persons  certainly  were  presbyters,  or  ordinary  ministers  of  the  gospel, 
whether  they  had  any  higher  character  or  no. 

"  There  is  no  accounting  for  the  succession,  in  the  catalogue,  which  pre- 
latists  present,  without  supposing  that  some  of  the  first  persons  named  in  it 
were  presbyters,  or  such  officers  whereof  there  were  a  number  in  the  same 
church,  who  governed  it  jointly.  Here  1  shall  use  the  words  of  the  author  of 
An  Historical  and  Rational  Inquiry  into  the  Necessity  of  an  Uninterrupted 
Succession  of  Diocesan  Bishops,  page  31.  '  Supposing  there  should  have 
been  such  a  succession  of  persons  from  St.  Peter  as  are  mentioned,  yet  those 
that  are  mentioned  as  his  next  successors  might  not  be  a  succession  of  diocesan 
bishops  superior  in  office  to  presbyters,  but  rather  a  number  of  presbyters  that 
governed  the  church  in  common.  Presbyters  they  are  called  by  Irenseus, 
(Fragment  of  the  Epistle  to  Victor,  about  the  Easter  Controversies,)  who 
having  occasion  to  mention  the  practice  of  the  church  of  Rome  before  Soter, 
he  calls  them  the  presbyters  that  governed  the  church,  which  he  now  presided 
over.  And  when  we  consider  the  uncertainty  of  the  accounts,  concerning  the 
order  in  which  they  succeeded,  sometimes  one,  sometimes  another  being  men- 
tioned as  the  immediate  successor  of  St.  Peter  and  Paul,  and  so  the  like  varia- 
tion in  the  account  of  the  second  and  third  successors;  it  is  not  improbable, 
that  they  might  govern  the  church  togetlier  in  common  as  presbyters,  (for  such 
Irenseus  calls  tliem,)  and  that  their  governing  the  church  in  common,  is  no 
improbable  conjecture.  I  find  it  espoused  by  the  learned  Vossius,  and  main- 
tained by  iiim,  (vols  2,  Ep.  and  fin.  Cla.  Colellerii,)  where  he  lays  down  this 
as  the  form  of  government  in  the  Roman  church:  1.  Linus,  Cletus,  Anacletus, 
2.  Cletus,  Anacletus,  and  Clemens.  3.  Cletus,  Anacletus.  4.  Anacletus, 
Solus.  5.  Evaristus,  who  began  a  succession  of  single  persons,  whereas  before 
there  used  to  be  two  or  three.  The  reasons  by  which  he  enforceth  this  order, 
are  the  acts  of  Pope  Damasus,  who  saith  expressly,  that  Peter  ordained  two 
bishops,  Linus  and  Cletus,  to  govern  the  people,  while  he  gave  himself  to 
prayer  and  preaching.  And  he  observes,  this  passage  is  not  in  the  printed 
books,  but  in  the  written  copy,  and  so  quoted  by  Marianus  Scotus.  Linus 
being  taken  away  by  martyrdom,  Clemens  is  put  in  his  place  with  Cletus. 
And  this  he  proves  thus  :  Cletus  is  said  to  sit  from  anno  76,  to  83.  Clemens  is 
said  to  sit  from  68  to  79.  Therefore  these  two  persons  coincide  ;  but  the  for- 
mer quotation  from  Damasus  shows  that  Cletus  was  made  pastor  before  76, 
yea,  by  the  aposile  liimself ;  and  then  he  shows,  that  though  Clement  was  sent 
into  bai)ishment  about  79,  yet  Cletus  was  not  alone,  but  Anacletus  with  him, 
who  survived  all  these,  and  suffered  martyrdom  about  95.  He  observes,  that 
Eusebius  was  the  first  who  assigned  to  the  distinct  persons  certain  years,  one 
succeeding  another,  who  did  very  ill,  because,  according  to  him,  Clement  suc- 
ceeded Anacletus,  anno  93,  whereas  the  epistle  written  in  his  name  was  writ 
during  the  standing  of  tiie  temple,  that  is,  before  the  year  7L  But  see  the 
epistle  itself.  By  all  this  it  appears  that  these  several  persons.  Linns,  Cletus, 
Anacletus,  were  not  so  many  diocesan  bishops  that  governed  the  church  of 
Rome,  one  succeeding  another;  but  so  many  presbyters  (as  IrenjBus  calls 
them)  that  governed  that  church,  sometimes  two,  and  sometimes  three  togeth- 
er.' Thus  far  this  author  :  to  which  I  shall  only  add,  that  I  know  of  no  other 
scheme  on  which  the  difficulties  that  occur  in  the  succession  of  these  persons 
can  be  solved  ;  and  if  this  be  admitted,  it  destroys  the  succession  in  a  hne  of 
bishops,  and  establishee  that  in  the  line  of  presbyters. 

"  The  objections  made  against  particular  persons,  through   whom  the  line 


VOTKS    70    l.ECTUKE    VI. 


153 


must  run,  do  generally,  if  not  universally,  relate  to  their  character  as  bishops, 
and  not  as  presbvters.  Thus,  for  instance,  none  dispute  Dr.  Parker's  ordina- 
tion as  a  presbyter  :  but  many  question,  for  the  reasons  that  have  been  men- 
tioned, whether  his  consecration  as  a  bishop  was  regular  or  even  valid.  Now, 
thousrh  our  ordinations  are  derived  from  him,  as  well  as  yonr's  ;  yet  they  are 
not  at  all  affected,  according  to  our  principles,  by  the  dispute  about  his  conse- 
cration ;  for  we  believe  that  he  had  pnwer  to  ordain  a.s  a  presbyter:  whereas, 
according  to  your  own  principles  all  your  ordinations  do  absfilutely  depend 
on  the  validity  of  his  disputed  consecration.  If  his  consecration  was  invalid, 
all  your  ordinations  are  likewise  invalid  :  and  as  his  consecration  is,  at  best, 
much  disputed,  and  very  doubtful,  't  is  impossible  that  your  ordinations,  which 
depend  upon  it,  should  be  clear  and  indisputable. 

"  Upon  the  whole,  if  I  was  now  to  be  ordained,  and  thought  it  my  duty  to  seek 
ordination  wliere  there  was  the  fairest  probability  of  being  within  the  uninter- 
rupted succession,  I  should  think  myself  much  safer  in  taking  presbyterian 
ordination,  than  episcopal  orders.  But,  after  all,  as  the  gospel  has  not  by 
express  and  positive  prescription,  m^ide  an  uninterrupted  succession  of  regular 
ordinations,  in  any  line  whatever,  absolutely  es.sential  to  the  ministerial  char- 
acter, I  conceive  we  have  no  right  to  make  it  so  ;  and  since  God  has  not  in  his 
providence  kept  up  clear  and  certain  evidence  of  the  fact,  I  can't  but  think  it 
is  very  dangerous  for  us  to  pretend  to  it ;  and  that  it  is  in  effect  giving  up  the 
cause  of  Christianity  to  make  the  lawfulness  of  the  ministry,  and  the  validity 
and  effect  of  gospei  ordinances,  absolutely  to  depend  upon  it." 

So  in  the  Sketchof  Hist,  and  Princ.  of  Fresb.  in  Eng.  p.  3d:  "And  no  scripture 
can  be  adduced  to  prove  that  the  twelve  apostles,  either  received  a  commis- 
sion to  ordain,  or  did  ordain,  or  gave  authority  to  ordain  ;  while  it  is  quite  clear 
that  others  ordained  who  were  not  apostles,  (Acts  xiii.  1,  3  ;)  or,  if  the  apostles 
ordained  successors,  it  was  simply  successors  in  the  ministry  of  the  gospel,  not 
in  the  apostleship.  Indeed,  not  one  single  passage  of  scripiure  can  1  e  adduced 
to  show  that  consecration  and  ordination  are  two  distinct  things,  —  tiiat  there 
is  one  way  of  appointing  prelates,  and  another  way  of  appointing  priests  or 
presbyters,  the  former  of  which  is  transmissible,  and  the  latter  not  trans- 
missible." 

Baxter  uses  another  argument  to  show  the  unscripturality  of  prelacy.  "  I 
prove,"  says  he,  (Five  Disputations  on  Chr.  Gov.  1658,  Disp.  1,  Arg.  10, 
p.  51  ;  see"  also  p.  (J7.)  "  the  minor  according  to  their  own  interpretation  of 
Titus  i.5,  and  other  texts.  Every  city  should  have  a  bishop  and  it  may  be  a 
presbytery,  (and  so,  many  councils  have  determined;  only,  when  they  grew 
greater,  they  e.vcept  cities  that  were  too  small ;  but  so  did  not  Paul.)  But  the 
episcopacy  of  England  is  contrary  to  this  ;  for  one  bishop  only  is  over  many 
cities.  If  therefore  they  will  needs  have  episcopacy,  they  should  at  least  have 
had  a  bishop  in  every  city.  Now,  when  the  apostle  formed  new  cl  uches  with 
officers  over  them,  he  gave  them  no  authority  to  institute  any  different  kind  of 
churches,  or  any  different  order  of  ministers,  but  only  such  as  he  had  appointed 
t-)  succeed  them  in  the  same  office." 

"  Now,  if  the  apostles,"  says  Mr.  Baynes,  (Diocesan's  Tryall,  p.  60.)  "  had 
done  this  with  retnrence  to  a  further  and  more  eminent  pastor  and  governor, 
they  would  have  intimated  somewhere  this  their  intention  :  but  ihis  they  do 
not;  yea,  the  contrary  purpose  is  by  them  declared  For  Peter  so  biddeth  his 
presbyters  feed  their  flocks,  as  that  he  doth  insinuate  them  subject  to  no  cthiT 
but  Christ,  the  arch-shepherd  of  them  all.  Again,  ihe  apostles  could  not  make 
the  presbyters  pastors  without  power  of  government.  There  may  he  governors 
without  pastoral  power;  but  not  a  pastor  without  power  of  governing.  For 
the  power  of  the  pedum,  or  shepherd's  staff,  doth  intrinsically  follow  the  pas- 
toral office."' 

NOTE  D. 

I  -WILL  here  give  another  illustration  from  the  Old  Testament,  taken  from  a 
very  rare  treatise  of  Matthew  Henry,  not  found  among  his  published  works, 
and  preserved  by  the  Rev.  Shepard  Kollock.  It  is  •'  A  Brief  Enquiry  into  the 
Nature  of  Schism."  (Lend.  1717,  pp.  5,  6,  7.)     "  Only  one  scripturo  occurs  m 

20 


164  NOTES    TO    LECTURE    VI. 

the  Old  Testament,  which  perhaps  will  help  to  rectify  some  mistake  about 
Bchism.  It  is  the  instance  of  KIdad  and  Mcdad,  who  propiiesied  in  the  camp. 
The  case,  in  short,  is  this ;  Eldad  and  Medad  were  persons  upon  whom  ihe 
spirit  rested,  i.e.  who  were  by  the  extraordinary  working  of  the  spirit  endued 
with  gifts  equal  to  the  rest  of  the  seventy  elders,  and  were  written,  i.  e.  had 
a  call  to  the  work,  but  they  went  not  out  unto  the  tabernacle  as  the  rest  did, 
though  God  himself  had  appointed  that  they  should,  v  16.  And  they  proph- 
esied in  the  camp,  i.  e.  exercised  their  gifts  in  private  among  their  neighbors, 
in  some  common  tent.  Upon  what  inducements  they  did  this,  doth  not  appear ; 
but  it  is  evident  that  it  was  their  weakness  and  infirmity  tlius  to  separate  from 
the  rest  of  their  brethren.  If  any  think  they  prf)phesied  by  a  necessitating 
and  irresistible  impulse,  they  may  remember,  that  the  spirit  of  the  prophets  is 
subject  to  the  prophets. 

"  Now,  if  some  of  the  schismaticating  doctors  that  the  church  has  known  had 
but  had  the  censuring  of  Eldad  and  Medad,  we  should  soon  have  had  a  judg- 
ment given  ai;ainst  them  much  more  severe,  than  would  have  been  awarded 
to  him  that  gathered  sticks  on  the  sabbath  day. 

"  And  'tis  confessed,  all  the  circumstances  considered,  it  looks  like  a  very 
great  irregularity,  especially  as  an  infringement  of  the  authority  of  Moses, 
which  they  who  prophesied  in  the  tabernacle  under  his  presidency  manifestly 
owned  and  submitted  to. 

"  Well,  an  information  was  presently  brought  in  against  them,  v.  27.  Eldad 
and  Medad  prophesy  in  the  camp,  that  is,  to  speak  in  the  invidious  language 
of  the  times,  there'  s  a  conventicle  at  such  a  place ;  and  Eldad  and  Medad  are 
holding  forth  at  it. 

"  Joshua,  in  his  zeal  for  that  which  he  fancied  to  be  the  church's  unity,  and 
out  of  a  concern  for  the  authority  of  Moses,  brings  in  a  bill  to  silence  them  ; 
f«>r  as  hot  as  he  was,  he  would  not  have  them  fined  and  laid  in  the  jail  for  this 
disorder  neither  ;  only,  my  lord  Moses,  forbid  them  :  not  compel  them  to  come 
to  the  tabernacle,  if  they  be  not  satisfied  to  come,  only  for  the  future  prohibit 
their  schismatical  preaching  in  the  camp.     This  seemed  a  very  good  motion. 

"  But  hold,  Joshua,  thou  knowest  not  what  manner  of  spirit  thou  art  of.  Dis- 
cerning Moses  sees  him  acted  by  a  spirit  of  envy,  and  doth  not  only  deny,  but 
severely  reprove,  the  motion,  v.  29.  Enviest  thou  for  my  sake?  Would  to 
God  that  all  the  Lord's  people  were  prophets,  provided  the  Lord  will  but  put 
his  spirit  upon  them  He  is  so  far  from  looking  upon  it  as  schism,  that  he 
doth  not  only  tolerate  but  encourage  it.  And  O  that  all  those  who  sit  in  Moses' 
chair,  were  but  clothed  with  this  spirit  of  Moses." 


LECTURE   VIL 


THE    PRELATICAL    DOCTRINE    OF    APOSTOLICAL    SUCCESSION    TESTED    BY 

SCRIPTURE. 

THE    SUBJECT    CONCLUDED. 


We  have  already  brought  this  prelatic  doctrine  of  apostolical 
succession  to  the  balances  of  the  sanctuary.  VVe  have  shown, 
first,  that  when  thus  tested,  it  is  found  to  be  contrary  to  the 
spirit  and  teaciiing  of  the  scriptures  —  secondly,  to  that  one 
ministerial  commission  upon  vvliich  the  christian  ministry  rests 
its  entire  authority,  and  which  recognizes  only  one  order:  — 
and  thirdly,  to  the  divine  promises,  as  contained  in  scripture, 
and  which  cannot,  without  the  greatest  violence  and  arrogance, 
be  exclusively  appropriated  by  the  clergy  of  any  denomination, 
or  by  any  particular  or  self-styled  Catholic  church.^ 


])  As  a  further  exhibition  of  the 
importance  attaclied  by  its  advocates 
to  this  doctrine,  tniie  tlie  following  : 
*'  Such,  therefore,  as  have  laid  aside 
ordination  by  the  highest  grade  of  the 
ministry,  and  substituted  in  its  place 
ordination  by  the  second  grade,  have 
lost  tiie  sacerdotal  ofRce  ;  and  this  of- 
fice being  essential  to  the  very  exist- 
ence of  tTie  church,  they  can  no  longer 
be  regarded  as  in  a  church  slate." 
Dr.  How's  Vind.  of  the  Prot.  Ep.  Ch. 
p.  123. 

Haxter,  in  his  True  and  Only  Way 
of  Concord,  (bond.  1680,  Pt.  iii.  p.  90, 
91,)  gives  tiie  following  abstract  of 
DodwelTs  doctrine  on  this  subject, 
whose  book  he  professes  to  answer  : 

"  1.  That  the  ordinary  means  of  sal- 
vation, are,  in  respect  of  every  particu- 
lar person,  confined  to  the  episcopal 
communion  to  the  place  he  lives  in,  as 
long  as  he  believes  in  it. 


"  2.  That  we  cannot  be  assured  that 
God  will  do  for  us  what  is  necessary 
for  salvation  on  his  part,  otherwise 
than  by  his  express  promises  that  he 
will  do  it. 

"  3  Therefore  we  must  have  interest 
in  his  covenant. 

"4.  Therefore  we  must  have  the 
sacrament,  by  which  the  covenant  is 
transacted. 

"  .5.  These,  as  legally  valid,  are  to  be 
had  only  in  the  external  communion 
of  the  visible  church. 

"  6.  This  is  only  the  episcopal  com- 
munion of  the  place  we  live  in. 

*•  7.  The  validity  of  the  sacraments 
depends  on  the  authority  of  the  per- 
sons, by  whom  they  are  administered. 

"8.  No  ministers  have  autliority  of 
administering  sacraments,  but  only 
they  that  have  their  orders  in  the  epis- 
copal communion. 

"  9.  This  cannot  be  from  God,  but 


156 


SCRIPTURE    FACTS    VERSUS    PRELACY. 


[lECT.  VII. 


We  will  now  endeavor  lo  show  that  this  doctrine  of  prelati- 
cal  succession  (for  we  ourselves  claim  a  ministerial,  —  ihoui^h 
not  a  lineal  and  personal,  succession,)  is  equally  as  contrary  to  the 
facts  of  scripture,  as  it  is  to  its  spirit,  its  principles,  its  teachings, 
its  promises,  and  its  predictions. 

Ordination,  we  are  told,  hy  the  imposition  of  the  hands  of  a 
prelate,  is  essential  to  the  validity  of  the  ministry,'  to  the  efficacy 
of  ordinances  —  and  to  the  visibility  and  perpetuity  of  the 
churcii  of  Christ.'^  And  this  succession  is  mediately  derived 
from  the  apostles,  the  first  duly  commissioned  prelates  of  the 
church. 

Now,  is  it  not  a  most  wonderful  thing,  that  ordination  should 
make  individuals  now,  what  it  did  not  make  them  in  the  days 
of  the  apostles?^  For  the  apostles  were  not  made  bishops  by 
ordination  ;  neither  were  they  ever  ordained  at  all,  as  prelimi- 
nary to  their  ministry.*  And  when  they,  in  joint  conclave,  filled 
up  the  vacant  see,  which  had  been  voided  by  the  death  of  the 
apostate  metropolitan  Judas  ;  it  is  further  true,  that  even  when 
thus  left  to  themselves,  our  Lord  having  gone  to  heaven,  "they 
did    not    ordain  in    the   manner  afterwards    adopted,    by    the 


by  a  continued  succession  of  persons 
orderly  receiving  authority  Ironi  those 
who  had  authority  to  give  it  them, 
(viz.  bishops.)  from  those  first  times  of 
the  apostles,  to  ours  at  present. 

"  10.  That  the  Holy  Ghost  is  the 
instituter  of  this  order,  and  to  violate 
it,  by  administering  without  such  or- 
dination, IS  TO  SIN  AGAINST  THE  HoLY 
Ghost,  the  sin  that  hath  no  other 
baciufice  and  promise  ok  pardon. 

"II.  Thai  the  ordained  have  no  more 
or  other  power  than  the  ordainers 
intend  or  profess  to  give  them 

"  12.  That  it  is  certain,  that  the 
bishops  of  all  former  ages  intended  not 
to  give  presbyters  power  of  oidaining 
or  administering  cut  of  their  subjec- 
tion ;  ergo,  they  have  it  not." 

1)  Mr.  Keble  laborsto  prove, that 
it  is  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  of 
England,  that  the  Holy  Ghost  is  re- 
i  lly  communicated   by  a  supernatural 

f;ift,  with  the  imposition  of  the  |)re- 
ate's hands, and  that  thus"  the  episco- 
pal succession  is  a  channel  of  special 
graces."  He  shows,  that  the  words  in 
the  ordination  service  are  to  be  taken 
literally,  not  as  a  prayer,  but  as  ex- 
pressive of  an  actual  bestowment ;  for 
which,  he  says,  '-the  language  of  which 
the,  (viz.  Mr.  Whitgilt,)  was  so  un- 
rivalled a  master,  fails  him,  as  it  were, 


in  his  endeavor  to  find  words  to  ex- 
press the  greatness  of  the  gill  which 
lie  there  apprehended."  According  to 
Whilgifl,  "  the, Slime  power  isnoio  airen, 
(Mr.  Keble's  italics.)  as  was  originally 
given  to  the  apostles.  So  that  "  he 
which  receiveth  the  burden  is  thereby 
forever  warranted  to  have  the  spirit 
with  him  and  in  him,  for  his  assistance, 
countenance  and  support."  "  Wheth- 
er, theiefore,  we  preach  or  pray,  l)ap- 
tize,  &c.,  our  words,  judgments,  acts, 
aid  deeds,  are  not  ours,  l)nt  the  Holy 
Ghost's.  '  "  The  power  ()f  the  minis- 
try giveth  daily  the  Holy  Ghost." 
For  all  this,  lie  adduces  also  the  au- 
thority of  Hooker,  (Priniit.  Trad.  p. 
102-104,)  as  he  might  also  that  of 
Bishop  Beveridge.  See  Wks.  vol.  ii. 
passim. 

2)  See  Palmer,  i  p.  161,  &c.  and 
vol  ii.  p.  440,  443. 

3)  Baxter,  in  his  True  and  Only 
Way  of  Concord,  Lond.  1681,  p.  212, 
largely  proves,  that  in  cases  of  neces- 
sity there  maybe  a  true  bishop  or  pres- 
byter, without  any  ordination.  So 
als:>  in  Part  iii.  p.  79. 

4)  Bishop  Beveridge  aflirms,  that 
Christ,  during  his  personal  ministry, 
did  not  ordain  the  apostles.  Wks.  vol. 
ii.  p.  liG. 


LECT.    VII.]  SCRIPTURE    FACTS    VERSUS    PRELACY.  157 

laying  on  of  hands.'"  Such,  then,  was  the  case  as  it  regards 
Matlliias.'^  Ordination,  therefore,  can  never  continue  in  succes- 
sive iinpartations,  what  it  never  originated.  JNor  can  it  be  either 
a  necessary  and  inseparable  sign  or  seal  of  that  grace  and  au- 
thority, with  which  it  never  was  connected  by  divine  appoint- 
ment,—  or  under  divine  teaching  and  example  ; — since  without 
it,  those  very  gifts  were  bestowed  on  the  very  persons,  who  are 
made  the  patterns  of  all  their  successors. 

So  utterly  unknown  was  this  theory  of  sacramental  ordina- 
tion, as  the  great  means  of  all  clerical  grace,  to  the  sacred 
writers,  —  that  when  Paul  the  apostle,  who  had  already  ap- 
proved his  apostleship,  by  many  a  hard  encounter,  and  by  nu- 
merous seals  of  his  ministry  ; —  when  this  same  Paul  was  to  be 
sent  forth  on  a  mission  to  the  heathen  —  he  was,  by  the  express 
dictation  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  ordained  with  the  imposition  of 
the  hands  of  tliree  brethren  belonging  to  the  church  at  Antiooh, 
called  teachers  and  prophets,  and  of  whom  therefore  it  were  an 
absurdity  too  gross  for  the  most  credulous  to  believe,  that  they 
were  prelates  and  not  rather  simple  presbyter-bishops.' 

Timothy,  in  like  manner,  was  set  apart  by  the  laying  on  of 
the  hands  of  a  presbytery  or  company  of  presbyters.  And  who 
can  imagine,  that,  at  this  period,  there  were  prelates  numerous 
enough  to  have  canonically  consecrated  Timothy  ?  And  who 
can  believe  these  prelates  would  be  denominated  by  the  name  of 
that  very  order  which  it  is  now  "  a  fundamental  article"  "of  the 
very  substance  of  the  faith,"  and  "essential  to  salvation,"  — 
to  believe  to  be  excluded,  by  divine  appointment,  from  such  a 
blasphemous  presumption  as  the  attempt  to  ordain,  and  above 
all,  to  ordain  a  prelate  ?  But  let  us  imagine  Timothy  to  be,  for 
a  moment,  duly  consecrated  a  prelate.  In  the  very  fact,  that 
the  Holy  Ghost,  in  recording  his  ordination,  uses  words  which,  by 
the  universal  suffrage  of  the  Latin,  and  many  of  the  Greek 
fathers,^  and  by  the  interpretation  of  common  sense,  refers  to 
presbyters,*  —  there   is    demonstrative   evidence,   that  no    such 

1)  So  say  the  Oxford  tractators,  cienl  Church,  proposed  in  the  year 
vol.  i.  p.  33.  1641,"    (London,  printed  IfioC),  p.   3,) 

2)  See  ibid.  "Iirnat'us  understood  Uie  community  of 

3)  Acts  xiii.  1-3.  See  this  case  the  rest  of  tlie  presl)yters  or  elders  who 
more  fully  considered  afterwards, when  then  h;id  a  hand,  not  only  in  the  delive- 
it  will  be  shown  that  the  passage  refers  rv  of  the  doctrine  and  sacrnnients.but 
to  rirdinalion,  and  tliat  this  ordina-  also  in  the  administr.ition  of  the  disci- 
lion  was  certainly  presbyterian.  See  pline  of  Christ,  for  further  proof  of 
the  forthcoininij  volume.  which  we  have  that  known  testiniony 

4)  See  Palmer,  vol.  ii.  of  TertuUian,  in    ills  general  apology 

5)  "By  the  presbytery,"  says  for  Clirislians.  "  The  presidents  who 
Archbishop  Usher,  in  iiis  "  Reduction  bear  rule  therein  are  certain  approved 
of  Episcopacy  into  the  Form  of  Synod-  elders,  who  have  obtained  this  honor, 
leal  GoveromRBt  received  Iq  the  An-  not  by  reward,  but  by  good  report." 


1S8 


SCRIPTURE   FACTS    VERSUS   PRELACY. 


[LECT.    VIl. 


distinction,  as  is  contended  for,  was,  at  that  time,  or  by  the  in- 
spired penmen,  ever  dreamed  of.  A  steady  and  exactly-defined 
constitution  of  oflicers,  never  fails  to  be  quickly  followed  by  a 
well-marked  usage,  assigning  certain  designations  to  certain 
functionaries  ;  to  disturb  which,  becomes  an  affront  to  dignities, 
and  is  instantly  resisted. 

"  On  this  rule  we  conclude,  with  some  degree  of  assurance, 
that,  during  the  apostolic  age,  forms  of  government  and  the  dis- 
tribution of  public  services  were  still  open  to  many  variations 
and  anomalies.  No  writer  of  the  age  of  Cyprian  uses  the 
words  bishop,  presbyter,  and  deacon,  so  indeterminately,  or  so 
abstractedly,  as  do  the  apostles.'" 

It  is  granted,  however,  that  "  the  same  appellations  are  in- 
discriminately given  to  ministers  in  the  New  Testament,"*  so 
that  from  the  use  of  the  separate  titles,  it  is  impossible  to  argue 
to  any  separate  order  or  function,  as  belonging  to  those  upon 
whom  these  titles  are  conferred.  Now,  in  our  judgment,  no 
other  admission  is  necessary  in  order  to  establish  the  certain 
fact,  that  tliis  doctrine,  which  lodges  in  prelates  the  sole  origi- 


Apologet.  cap.  39.  "  With  the  bishop, 
who  WIS  the  chief  president,  (i.  p.  4,) 
.  .  .  the  rest  of  the  dispensers  of  the 
word  and  sacraments  joined  in  the 
common  government  of  the  church." 
This  he  goes  on  to  prove  from  antiqui- 
ty, and  tlien  adds,  "  True  it  is,  tiiat 
in  our  church  this  kind  of  presbyterial 
government  hath  been  long  disused  ; 
yet,  seeing  it  still  professeth  that  ev- 
ery pastor  hath  a  right  to  rule  the 
church,  (from  whence  the  name,  rec- 
tor, also  was  at  first  given  unto  him,) 
and  to  administer  the  discipline  of 
Christ,  as  well  as  to  dispense  the  doc- 
trine and  sacraments,  and  the  restraint 
of  the  exercise  of  that  right  proceed- 
eth  truly  from  the  custom  now  received 
in  this  realm,  "no  man  could  doubt," 
&c.  (p.  ().)  Again,  in  1  Tim.  iv.  14,  and 
C  Tim.  i.  6,  it  is  said  :  "  St.  Paul  was 
the  principal  and  the  presbyters  were 
}iis  assistants,  according  to  the  consti- 
tution and  custom  of  our  church  in 
ordination.  The  bishop  is  not  to  do  it 
alone,  but  with  the  assistance  of  at 
least  three  or  four  of  the  ministers, 
which  was  alter  the  piittern  of  primi- 
tive times."  (Certain  Discourses  by 
by  the  late  Archbishop  of  Armairh, 
Lond.    IG5f),  p   1*3) 

Jeremy  Taylor  says,  the  presbytery 
that  ordained  Timothy  was  a  company 
of  bishops,  and  yet,  that  all  antiquity 
declare  it  was  a  cotop.iny  of  presby* 


ters.     See  Episc.  Asserted,  p.  191,  in 
Powell,  p.  21. 

1)  Spiritual  Despotism,  p.  IG6. 
See  also  164,  105. 

2)  Boyd  on  Epis.  1839,  p.  42. 
Bishop  Seabury  allows,  that  Paul, 
in  Acts  xxviii.,  calls  "  presbyters 
overseers,  in  Greek,  bishops  of  the 
church  of  God,  and  says  they  were 
made  so  by  the  Holy  Gliost."  "  They 
had,  therefore,  received  some  part,  at 
least,  of  the  apostolical  commission;  " 
by  what  process  of  division  we  are 
not  well  able  to  divine  !  "  But,"  he 
adds,  "  whatever  share  of  apostolical 
authority  these  bishops  lield,  whether 
the  ichole  or  only  a  fxirt ;  or,  however 
they  came  by  it,  ("strange  doubts  for  a 
jure  divi.no  prelatist,  the  compunctious 
visitings,  no  doubt,  of  conscience  and 
common  sense.)  they  were  manifestly 
subject  to  St.  Paul's  authority.'  How 
this  was,  the  doubting  bishop  seems  to 
leave  uncertain,  since,  as  he  further 
adds,  (p.  183.)  "  it  does  not  appear  that 
St.  Paul  had  any  further  personal  in- 
tercourse with  the  church  or  clergy  of 
Ephesus."  He  further  allows,  (p  8(i,) 
that  "  it  is  true,  that  in  most  of  St. 
Paul's  epistles,  the  apustles  of  the 
churches  to  whom  he  writes  are  not 
mentioned;  and  probably,  at  the  time 
of  writing  those  epistles, there  were 

NONE  APPOINTED." 


LECT.    VII.]  SCRIPTURE    FACTS    VERSUS    PRELACY.  159 

nal,  and  exclusive  power  of  the  sacred  ministry,  to  be  derived 
from  tliem  to  presbyters  and  deacons,  is  unsupported  by  scrip- 
ture. 

Bishop  Croft,  in  his  "True  State  of  the  Primitive  Church," 
has  this  language  :'  "  And  I  desire  you  to  observe,  that  of  those 
two  names,  presbyter  and  bishop,  if  there  be  any  dignity  and 
eminency  expressed  in  one  more  than  the  other,  sure  it  is  in 
the  name  of  presbyter,  not  bishop  ;  because  the  apostles  them- 
selves, and  the  chief  of  the  apostles,  (as  some  would  have  it 
who  stand  highest  on  their  pantables,)  are  in  scripture  styled 
presbyters  or  elders,  as  the  word  in  our  English  translation  sig- 
nifies, but  never  bishops,  as  I  remember.  And,  therefore,  I  can- 
not but  w'onder  why  that  haughty  head  of  the  papists  should 
not  assume  to  himself  the  title  of  his  pretended  predecessor, 
St.  Peter,  presbyter  rather  than  bishop,  unless  it  be  by  God's 
providential  disposure,  to  show  his  blindness  in  this  as  well  as  in 
other  things,  and  make  him  confute  himself  by  this  name  of 
bishop,  which  was  never  given  to  St.  Peter,  no  more  than  St. 
Peter  gave  unto  him  the  headship  of  the  church."  "  The  word 
bishop,  eTCKTKOTrog,  indeed,  is  never  used  in  the  New  Testament  to 
signify  the  office  of  oversight  over  ministers,  but  only  over 
the  flock  of  Christ.'"* 

Not  only  does  this  conclusion  follow,  for  the  reasons  already 
given  ;  it  will  also  follow  from  another  view  of  the  matter  : 
for,  if  prelatists  "  admit,  and  always  have  admitted,"^  that 
"  the  same  appellations  are  indiscriminately  given  to  ministers 
in  the  New  Testament,"  then  is  it  assuredly  impossible  to  con- 
fine to  any  one  order,  what  may  be  alleged  as  belonging  to 
individuals  whom  prelatists  w^ould  rank  in  the  order  of  prelates ; 
since,  in  every  such  case,  the  term  employed  has,  as  they  say,  no 
peculiar  meaning,  and  may  be  as  well  applied  to  presbyters  as  to 
prelates.  An  order  of  prelates,  as  distinct  from  that  of  pres- 
byters, can  never  be  proved  from  scripture,  since,  on  these 
principles  there  are  no  terms  by  which  any  distinctive  order 
may  be  pointed  out,  and  all  powers  exercised  by  any  function- 
aries, may,  by  the  very  admission  of  our  opponents,  be  regard- 
ed as  exercised  by  presbyters  under  the  names  of  apostles, 
or  evangelists,  or  prophets ;  to  whom  were  granted,  by  our 
Lord,  to  meet  the  exigencies  of  the  church,  in  her  incipient 
state,  extraordinary  powers.  It  will  also  appear,  to  every  un- 
prejudiced mind,  that  there  is,  in  this  admitted  fact,  that  "  the 
same  appellations  are  indiscriminately  given  to  ministers  in  the 

1)  See  Scott's  Coll.  vol.  7,  p.  298.  3)  Boyd  on  Episcopacy,  p.  42. 

2)  Powell  on  Ap.  Succ.  p.  78. 


160  BCBIPTCRE    FACTS    VERSUS    PRELACY.  [lECT.  VII. 

New  Testament,"  a  very  strong  presumption  in  favor  of  the 
presbyterian  doctrine,  that  there  is  but  one  order  of  teachino;,  or 
ministerial  officers  in  the  church,  of  equal  official  power  and 
dignity.  There  are,  however,  various  designations  by  which 
these  officers  are  entitled  ;  while  it  is  also  true  that  they  were 
originally  distinguished  by  their  spiritual  gifts  and  powers,  and 
are  now  made  to  differ,  even  as  one  star  difFereth  from  another 
in  glory,  by  iheir  mental  endowments,  or  their  ministerial  attain- 
ments. 

In  perfect  harmony  with  this  conclusion,  is  the  fact,  that  not 
one  single  exain[)le  of  prelatical  ordination  can  be  produced  from 
the  word  of  God.  There  is  not  a  single  instance  in  which  any 
individual  was  set  apart  to  the  sacred  ministry,  by  the  instru- 
mentality of  only  one  ordainer.  In  every  case,  in  which  we  have 
any  intelligible  record  of  the  fact  of  an  ordination,  we  find  that  it 
was  accomplished  by  a  plurality  of  ordainers.  So  it  was  in  the 
cases  already  mentioned,  and  so  was  it  also  in  the  ordinations 
spoken  of  in  Acts  xiv.  23,  and  which  were  solemnized  by  Paul  and 
Barnabas,  who,  as  we  have  just  i>een,  and  shall  see  more  fully 
afterwards,  had  received  only  presbyterian  ordination.  For  this 
purpose  do  we  find  a  plurality  of  presbyters  in  many  or  all  of  the 
churches  planted  by  the  apostles;  as  at  Ephesus ;  at  Antioch ; 
and  at  Philippi ;  and  with  whom  doubtless  both  Timothy  and 
Titus  co-operated  in  carrying  out  the  injunctions  of  the  apostle ; 
Timothy  and  the  apostles  having  been  themselves  thus  set  apart 
to  the  woik  of  the  ministry,  and  the  apostles  having  sanctioned 
it  by  their  own  practice. 

It  is  indeed  said,  that  Paul  instructed  Timothy  to  "lay 
hands  suddenly  on  no  man."  But  surely  this  does  not  neces- 
sarily teach  that  he  was  to  do  so  alone,  when  he  did  deliber- 
ately enter  upon  that  important  duty  ;  no  more  than  the  injunc- 
tion given  to  this  same  individual,  by  this  same  apostle,  "give 
attendance  to  reading,  to  exhortation,  to  doctrine,"  implies,  that 
no  other  minister  at  Ephesus  was  at  liberty  to  attempt  the  same 
duties.  And,  besides,  it  was  customary  in  the  later  church, 
in  the  imposition  of  hands,  for  each  ordainer  to  place  only  his 
right  hand  upon  the  head  of  the  consecrated  person  ;  the  very 
mention  o{ hands  in  this  direction  may,  therefore,  impliedly  refer 
to  the  co-operation  of  other  presbyters  in  the  act  of  ordination.^ 

But,  however  this  may  be,  no  record  can  be  shown  of  any 
ordination,  where  there  were  not  present  at  least  a  plurality  of 
persons.  Nor  is  the  declaration  of  Paul  to  Timothy,  to  "  stir 
up  the  gift  of  God  which  was  in  him,  by  the  putting  on  of  his 
hands,"  in  any  thing  contrary  to  this  conclusion.     This  passage 

1)  Se«  Bjnii  Concilia,  vol.  2,  p.  982,  and  Plea  for  PresbyUry^  p.  27. 


LECT.  Vn.]     THE    DECISIONS    OF    SCRIPTURE    VERSUS    PRELACY.  161 

cannot,  to  say  the  least,  be  ever  shown  to  refer  to  ordination  at 
all.  On  the  contrary,  there  are,  we  think,  good  reasons  for  in- 
terpreting it  as  having  reference  to  the  communication  of  some 
spiritual  gift.'  Such  gifts,  we  know,  were  very  commonly  im- 
parted by  individuals  singly  ;  and  since  they  were  extraordi- 
nary, and  temporary,  there  was  no  necessity  for  that  security 
which  is  required  in  the  consecration  of  ministers.  Ordination, 
too,  as  has  been  shown,  was  never,  so  far  as  is  recorded,  per- 
formed by  one  individual  alone.  This  view  is,  we  think,  forced 
upon  us  by  the  language.  For  if  the  word  "  gift "  is  made  to 
refer  to  the  office  of  the  ministry,  it  were  nothing  short  of  ab- 
surdity to  ask  any  minister  to  "stir  up  the  sacred  office  of  God, 
which  sacred  office  is  in  him,  by  the  putting  on  of  hands;" 
whereas  it  would  be  perfectly  correct  to  exhort  such  an  one,  to 
whom  had  been  imparted  some  spiritual  and  internal  gift,  to 
"stir  up  this  gift  of  God  that  was  thus  in  him."  And  when  we 
look  to  the  whole  passage,  we  find  that  the  apostle  speaks  to 
Timothy  of  the  "  unfeigned  failh  that  was  in  him,"  and  "  where- 
fore,'^ adds  the  apostle,  "stir  up  the  gift  of  God  which  is  in 
thee ;"  "  for  God  hath  not  given  us  the  spirit  of  fear,"  "  be  not 
thou,  therefore,  ashamed  of  the  testimony  of  the  Lord,"  Sic. 
We  are,  therefore,  led  to  conclude  that  the  allusion  of  the  apos- 
tle here,  was  to  tiie  bestowmentof  an  abundant  measure  of  faith, 
in  the  way  of  supernatural  gift,  by  his  hands  to  his  son  Timo- 
thy, and  not  to  ordination  at  all." 

But  to  proceed,  we  further  remark,  that  the  opposition  of 
this  doctrine  of  apostolical  succession  —  by  the  personal  and 
hereditary  transmission  of  heavenly  gifts  —  to  many  of  the  de- 
cisions of  scripture,  is  not  less  palpable. 

The  truth  —  the  whole  truth,  and  nothing  but  the  truth  of 
God,  as  it  is  cemented  together  in  the  writings  of  the  apostles  and 
prophets,  —  this  is  the  foundation,  and  the  only  sure  foundation, 
on  which  the  church  can  rest.  That  is  the  church,  which  has 
this  truth  for  its  ground,  and  which,  as  a  pillar  of  testimony, 
publishes  it  to  the  world.  That  is  not  the  church  of  God, 
which  is  not  found  holding  forth  the  truth  ;  for  it  is  against  this 
truth,  as  a  rock  immovable  as  the  everlasting  hills,  that  the 
gates  of  hell  shall  never  prevail. '^  Such  is  the  judgment  of 
God's  word.     And  we  are  here  required  to  keep  aloof  from  all 

1)  Bishop   Hoadly    says,    as    in-  Works  on  Episcopacy,  vol.  i.  p.  146.) 
deed  any  one  would  judge,  "  that  this  2)  See  this  meaning  developed  in 

word  rather  imports  the  extranr dinar xj  Plea  for  Presbytery,  p.  26,  23. 
qualijicaliovs  given    to  Timothy  from  3)  See  this  fully  shown  when  we 

above,  for  the  better  execution  of  his  come  to  discuss  what  is  the  true  apos- 

ofEce,  than  the  office  itself."    (See  in  tolical  succession. 

21 


162  THE    DECISIONS   OF    SCRIPTURE   VERSUS   PRELACY.      [LECT.  VII. 

pretended  ministers  who  are  not  men  of  God,  and  who  do  not 
preach  the  glorious  gospel  of  the  blessed  God.'  They  who 
"  handle  the  word  of  God  deceitfully,"  (2  Cor.  iv.  2  ;)  who 
"have  corrupted  the  word  of  God,"  (2  Cor.  ii.  17;)  "de- 
nied the  resurrection,"  (Cor.  xv  ;)  —  such  teachers  "  are  to  be 
held  accursed  by  us,"  (Gal.  v.  12,  and  1  Tim.  vi.  3 — 5  ;  2 
Thess.  V.  15;  Rom.  xvi.  17,  18;  1  John  iv.  1  j  Acts  xx.  29, 
30  ;  Rev.  ii.  16  ;  Rev.  xviii.  1 — 4.) 

Of  all  the  qualifications  laid  down  any  where  in  scripture  for 
the  office  of  a  christian  bishop,  never  is  it  prescribed  as  neces- 
sary, that  he  should  be  able  to  authenticate  his  lineal  descent, 
through  a  personal  succession,  from  the  apostles.  And  yet,  by 
the  theory  in  question,  this  is  made  to  be  the  first  and  most  ne- 
cessary mark  of  a  true  christian  bishop.** 

How  are  christians  directed  in  scripture  to  try  the  character 
of  their  teachers  ?^  "  Beware  of  false  prophets,"  said  our 
Lord,  "  who  come  to  you  in  sheep's  clothing,  but  inwardly  they 
are  ravening  wolves."  But  how  shall  we  beware  of  them,  or  by 
what  criterion  shall  we  distinguish  the  false  from  the  true  ?  Shall 
we  critically  examine  their  spiritual  pedigree,  and  see  whether, 
by  an  uninterrupted  succession  of  regular  baptisms  and  ordina- 
tions, they  be  regularly  descended  from  the  apostles  ?  Impossi- 
ble. A  method,  this,  which  would  involve  every  thing  in  impene- 
trable darkness,  and  plunge  all  the  hopes  and  prospects  of  the 
christian  into  a  scepticism,  from  which  there  could  be  no  re- 
covery. On  the  contrary,  the  test  he  gives  is  plain  and  famil- 
iar. Mark  his  words  :  "Ye  shall  know  them  by  their  fruits. 
Do  men  gather  grapes  of  thorns,  or  figs  of  thistles?  Even  so 
every  good  tree  bringeth  forth  good  fruit,  but  a  corrupt  tree 
bringeth  forth  evil  fruit.  A  good  tree  cannot  bring  forth  evil 
fruit,  neither  can  a  corrupt  tree  bring  forth  good  fruit.  Every 
tree  that  bringeth  not  forth  good  fruit,  is  hewn  down  and  cast 
into  the  fire.  Wherefore,  by  their  fruits  ye  shall  know  them." 
And  the  apostle  John  says,  "Believe  not  every  spirit,  but  try 
the  spirits,  whether  they  are  of  God."  And  how  are  we  to  try 
them  ?  The  sequel  plainly  shows,  that  it  is  by  the  coincidence 
of  their  doctrine  with  that  of  the  gospel.  The  like  was  also 
the  method  prescribed,  under  the  former  dispensation,  by  the 
prophet.  "  To  the  law  and  to  the  testimony,"  says  he,  "  if 
they  speak  not  according  to  this  word,  it  is  because  there  is  no 
light  in  them."     A  very  different  mode  of  trial  would  now  be 

1)  Matli.  vii.   15-20,  and  xv.  14.      Lect.  on  Popery,  Puseyism  and  Prot- 
John,  X.   5.      2nd  Cor.  ii.    13,    with     estantism.    Lect.  v.  §  2. 

23.  3)  Campbell's  Lect.  on  Eccl.  His. 

2)  See  Rev.   T.   Archer's    sixth     Lect.  iv.  p.  60,  ed.  third. 


LECT.  VII. J         DECISIONS    OF    SCRIPTURE    VERSUS    PRELACY.  163 

assigned  by  a  zealous  patronizer  of  the  hierarchy,  popish  or 
protestant. 

"  Who  are  false  prophets?"  asks  Tertullian,  ''but  false  teach- 
ers— who  are  false  apostles?  but  they  who  preach  an  adulterated 
gospel.'"  "  The  church  is  not  bound,  therefore,  to  an  ordina- 
nary  succession,  as  they  call  it,  of  bishops  ;  but  to  the  gospel. 
When  bishops  do  not  teach  the  truth,  an  ordinary  succession 
avails  nothing  to  the  church  :  they  ought,  of  necessity,  to  be 
forsaken."     So  speaks  Melancthon.* 

Now,  by  this  decision,  the  fair  fabric  of  apostolical  succes- 
sion is  scattered  to  the  four  winds,  and  blasted  for  ever.  In 
Jackson's  Works,  there  is  a  chapter  in  which  he  professes  to 
show  that  "  the  Romish  church  hath  defiled  the  catholic  faith, 
and  by  defiling  it,  hath  lost  true  union  with  the  primitive  and 
apostolic  church."^  Hear  also  the  great  and  good  Bishop 
Jewell  :  "  The  grace  of  God  is  promised  to  pious  souls,  and  to 
those  who  fear  God,  and  is  not  affixed  to  bishop^s  chairs,  and 
personal  succession.  For  that  ye  tell  so  many  fair  tales  about 
Peter's  succession,  we  demand  of  you  wherein  the  pope  suc- 
ceedeth  Peter  ?  You  answer,  he  succeeded  him  in  his  chair ; 
as  if  Peter  had  been  some  time  installed  in  Rome,  and  had  sol- 
emnly sat  all  day  v\ith  his  triple  crown,  in  his  poniificalibus , 
and  in  a  chair  of  gold.  And  thus,  having  lost  both  religion 
and  doctrine,  ye  think  it  sufficient,  at  last,  to  hold  by  the  chair, 
as  if  a  soldier  that  had  lost  his  sword  would  play  the  man  with 
his  scabbard.  But  so  Caiaphas  succeeded  Aaron  ;  so  wicked 
Manassas  succeeded  David ;  so  tnay  antichrist  easily  sit  in 
Peter^s  chair.^'* 

But,  as  the  present  succession  of  the  Anglican  church  must 
stand  or  fall  with  this  corrupt  and  faulty  source,  therefore  is  it 
associated  with  it  in  its  merited  condemnation. 

It  has  been  already  shown,  on  the  testimony  of  a  learned  epis- 
copal writer,  who  has  lately  investigated  the  sul)ject,  that  this 
system  stands  inseparably  connected  with  that  apostacy  predict- 
ed by  the  apostles  ;  (see  2  Thess.  cb.  ii.,  2  Pet.  ch.  ii.,  iTim. 
ch.  iv.,  &ic.)  and  is,  therefore,  involved  in  the  condemnatory 
sentence  passed  upon  it.*     And  we  are  afraid  we  shall  make  it 

1)  De  Prescript,  c.  4.  5)  That  the  mystery  of  iniquity, 

2)  In  Powell  on  A  p.  Sue.  p.  151,  spoken  of  by  the  apostles,  refers,  in  its 
where  are  similar  statements  from  consummation,  to  the  papal  primacy, 
Ambrose,  Peter  Martyr,  Bishop  Jew-  and  in  its  progress  to  that  prelacy  on 
ell,  &c.  which  it  was  based,  has  been   shown 

3)  See  vol.  iii.  p.  870.  by    presbyterian    writers     in     former 

4)  Def.  of  Apology,  p.  634,  Edin.  times  as  it  has  recently  by  Mr.  Tay- 
1^9-  lor.     Thus  it  is  largely  handled  by  the 


164  SCRIPTURE    MANIFESTATIONS    VERSUS    PRELACY.       [lECT.  VII. 

too  plainly  evident,  when  we  come  to  investigate  the  decisions 
of  scripture  respecting  schism,  that  it  must  be  also  reprobated 
as  schismatical  by  the  just  judgment  of  Heaven. 

We  allow  these  arguments  at  present  to  pass  with  this  mere 
allusion  to  them,  and  would  bring  this  question  finally,  as  it  re- 
gards the  tests  of  scripture,  to  what  we  would  term  scripture 
MANIFESTATIONS,  or  the  testimony  of  God's  word,  as  it  is  inter- 
preted by  the  workings  of  God's  grace,  in  the  dispensations  of 
bis  mercy.' 

Do  other  denominations,  beside  those  which  are  prelatical, 
claim  to  be,  in  truth,  churches  of  Christ?  Then,  what  is  easier 
than  to  bring  them  to  the  test  of  experiment,  and  prove  them 
in  this  same  confident  boasting?  If  churches  of  Christ,  then  it 
is  but  fair  that  they  should  be  required  to  show  the  signs  of  a 
church.  If  good  and  not  wild  olive  trees,  then  should  they  be 
found,  not  merely  garnished  with  leaves,  or  even  fair  seeming 
blossoms,  but  laden  also  with  fruit,  fit  for  the  master's  use,  and 
worthy  of  the  care  bestowed  upon  them  by  the  husbandman. 
"  By  their  fruits  ye  shall  know  them."  This  is  a  rule  given  to 
us  by  the  Lord  himself;  and  in  no  case  could  it  be  applied  more 
safely  than  in  the  present.  For,  assuredly,  if  we  are  not 
churches  of  Christ,  but  mere  human  conventicles,  and  volun- 
tary societies; — if  we  are  not  true  worshippers  of  God,  but 
mere  "  meetingers,"  who  rather  offend  and  provoke  him  by 
our  unauthorized  forms;  —  if  the  promises  of  grace  apply  not 
to  us,  and  are,  therefore,  unfulfilled  in  us  —  if  our  ministry  and 
our  sacraments  are  no  better  than  mere  mockeries  —  then  it  is 
most  truly  an  easy  thing  to  make  evident  the  fact,  that,  like  the 
fleece  of  Gideon,  we  remain  dry,  while  they  enjoy  the  refresh- 
ing dews  of  divine  grace.  God  is  not  a  man,  that  be  should  lie  ; 
neither  hath  he  said  what  he  will  not  accomplish,  whether  it  be 
in  giving  or  in  withholding.  For  he  is  faithful  who  hath  pro- 
mised, and  he  cannot  deny  himself;  and  surely  no  second  Pro- 
metheus can  steal  down  grace  from  heaven,  and  thus  vivify, 
w'ith  divine  energy,  the  lifeless  carcass  of  a  mere  self-willed  cer- 
emonial. 

author  of  Causa  Episcopatus  Hierar-  ages,"  says  Dr.  Owen.  (Works,  vol.  19, 

hici  Lucifuga,  Edinburg,  1706,  ch.  iv.  p.  132,)    "was  moulded   and  framed 

lect.  2.  p.  r!!i3-162,  and  410.  after  the   pattern  of  the  civil  govern- 

It  is  tliere  shown  that  this  was  the  mentofthe  Roman  empire,  is  grant- 
opinion  of  Beza,  (p.  126,)  and  other  ed ;  and  that  conformity  (without  of- 
protestant  divines.  fence  to  any  be  it  spoken)  we  take  to 

The  powers  assumed  by  the  prelacy  be  a  fruit  of  the  working  of  the  mys- 

are  also  particularly  shown  to  be  con-  tery  of  iniquity." 
demned  in  such  passages,  and  to  be  1)  See  some  remarks  on  this  point 

in  principle  identical  with  the  papacy,  in   Dr.  Mitchell  a   Letters  to  Bishop 

"  That  the  state  of  churches  in  after  Skinner,  p.  45. 


LECT.  VII.]      SCRIPTURE    MANIFESTATIONS    VERSUS    PRELACY.  165 

As  a  criterion  of  the  true  church,  nothing  can  be  fairer  than 
to  take  the  evidence  of  facts,  in  proof  of  the  withholdment,  or 
bestowment  of  the  promised  blessings  of  Heaven  ;  seeing  that  to 
the  true  church  it  is  secured  as  a  divine  gift,  that  whatsoever 
she  binds  on  earth  shall  be  bound  in  Heaven.  This  canon  of 
judgment  is  allowed  even  by  Dr.  Wiseman,  the  learned  advo- 
cate of  Romanism,  and  by  Dr.  Hough,  the  able  episcopal  re- 
viewer of  his  disingenuous  and  Jesuitical  work  against  protest- 
ant  missions.  "  It  must  be,"  says  Dr.  Wiseman,  "  an  impor- 
tant criterion  of  the  true  rule  of  faith,  delivered  by  our  blessed 
Redeemer  to  his  church,  whether  the  preaching  according  to 
any  given  rule  has  received  the  success  promised  in  this  engage- 
ment on  his  part ;  or  whether  its  total  failure  proves  it  not  to 
have  satisfied  the  conditions  which  he  required.'" 

Consonant  to  these  views,  are  those  of  Mr.  Bristed,  himself 
an  episcopalian,  as  contained  in  his  thoughts  on  the  American- 
Anglo  churches.  "  However  this  may  be,  one  thing  is  certain, 
that  there  is  no  exclusive  church,  to  the  professing  members  of 
which  eternal  salvation  is  exclusively  confined.  For  it  is  man- 
ifest, that  divine  Providence  blesses  every  sect  and  denomina- 
tion of  christians  among  whom  the  doctrines  of  the  cross  are 
faithfully  preached  ;  whether  they  be  episcopalian,  or  presbyte- 
rian,  or  congregational.  All  these  religious  bodies  have  been 
blessed,  as  instruments  in  the  hand  of  God,  and  under  the  quick- 
ening, sanctifying  influences  of  the  Spirit,  to  the  conversion  of 
sinners,  the  purifying  of  the  life  and  conduct,  and  the  salvation 
of  souls  ;  as  is  evident,  by  a  cloud  of  witnesses,  in  different 
ages,  and  in  every  clime. '"* 

"  Now,  if  any  one  church,  whether  Greek,  or  Latin,  or  prot- 
estant ;  either  as  a  whole,  or  in  any  of  its  various  parts,  sub- 
divisions, or  sects,  were  an  exclusive  church:  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  who  is  the  head  of  the  church,  would  not  bless  the  min- 
isters of  any  other  denomination  with  his  presence,  nor  aid  them 
with  the  illuminations  of  his  spirit.  It  behooves  us,  therefore, 
to  extend   a  catholic    spirit  of  love,   esteem,    and    reverence, 

1)  Lectures  on  the  Romish  church  quos  homines  cliristo  uniri,  in  chris- 

during  the  Lent  of  1836,  p.  109,  110,  to  manere  et  per  christum  ad  vitam 

and  p.  27,  lect.  7,  and  Hough's  Vindic.  eternam  perdue!   possunt,  eos  ab  hoc 

of  Prot.  Missions,  p.  104,  so  also  by  viniulo  salutis  humanae,  fundamento 

Bishop  Davenant.     "  At  quot  spectat  alienatos  et  divulsos  nemo  afRrmare 

ecclesias  integras  utrum   fundamento  aut   cogitare  potest."     Bishop  Dave- 

suo    salutariter    maneant    conjunctae  nant  ad  Pacem  Eccl.  Adhortatio  Cant, 

necne,  ex  operationibus  quae  ab  eisdem  1640,  p  59,  and  p.  101,  chap.  8. 
exerceri   indies   possunt  et  Bolent  est  2)  The  same  rule   is  adopted  by 

Btatuendum.     In  quibus   enim  eccle-  Mr.  Newman  (on  Romanism,  p.  53,) 

siis  illi  actus  omnes   exercentur  per  in  reference  to  the  Romish  church. 


J66  SCRIPTURE    MANIFESTATIONS    VERSUS    PRELACY.      [lECT.  VJl. 

towards  all,  of  whatsoever  denomination  or  persuasion,  who 
preach  Jesu?  Christ,  and  him  crucified,  in  purity  of  doctrine,  in 
singleness  of  heart,  in  simplicity  and  in  trutli." 

*'  A  good  old  divine  says  :  '  I  have  seen  a  field  here,  and  another 
there,  stand  thick  with  corn.  An  hedge  or  two  has  parted  them. 
At  the  proper  season,  the  reapers  entered.  Soon  the  earth  was 
disburdened,  and  the  grain  was  conveyed  to  its  destined  place ; 
where,  blended  together  in  the  barn,  or  in  the  stack,  it  could 
not  be  known  that  a  hedge  once  separated  this  corn  from  that. 
Thus  it  is  with  the  church.  Here  it  grows,  as  it  were,  in  differ- 
ent fields,  severed,  it  may  be,  by  various  hedges.  By  and  by, 
when  the  harvest  is  come,  all  God's  wheat  shall  be  gathered 
into  the  garner,  without  one  single  mark  to  distinguish  that  once 
they  differed  in  the  outward  circumstantials  of  modes  and  forms.' 

"  If  there  were  an  exclusive  church,  membership  in  which  is 
essential  to  salvation,  and  all  out  of  its  pale  were  consigned  to 
perdition,  or  left  to  an  uncovenanted  contingency,  it  is  fair  to 
infer,  that  the  Holy  Spirit  would  have  revealed  it  in  the  word 
of  God,  as  plainly  as  he  has  revealed  any  other  truth,  belief  in 
which  is  necessary  to  salvation  ;  as  for  example  :  '  Thou  shall 
love  the  Lord  thy  God  with  all  thy  heart,  and  with  all  thy  soul, 
and  with  all  thy  strength  :'  or,  'He  that  believeth  (in  Christ 
Jesus)  shall  be  saved  ;  he  that  believeth  not,  shall  be  damned.' 
But,  as  this  is  not  done,  does  it  become  christians,  who  profess 
to  serve  one  and  the  same  Master,  to  love  one  common  Lord 
to  condemn  those  who  differ  from  them  in  opinion  about  church 
order,  and  church  government,  about  external  ceremonies,  rites, 
and  discipline  ?  " 

The  Rev.  Charles  Leslie,  who  in  his  reasoning  with  non- 
episcopalians,  is  most  unsparing  and  relentless,  yet,  in  arguing 
with  the  Romanists,  urges  this  very  point  with  great  force. 
"  For  what,"  says  he,'  "  have  we  to  do  to  judge  them  that  are 
without?  —  Them  that  are  without,  God  judgeth,'"'  And  God 
did  judge  one  who  was  without,  that  is,  out  of  the  pale  of  the 
church,  to  be  the  most  beloved  of  God,  and  that  '  there  was 
none  like  him  in  the  earth.''  And  he  is  put  upon  the  level 
with  the  greatest  in  the  church,  *  though  Noah,  Daniel  and  Job, 
were  in  it,'  he*  And  as  God  chose  a  Gentile  to  be  the  great 
example  of  patience  to  all  ages;^  and  of  another  Gentile  it  was 
said  by  Christ,  '1  have  not  found  so  great  faith,  no,  not  in 
Israel. 'e    And  He  who  said  often  to  his  disciples,  '  O  ye  of  little 

1)  Short  Method    with   the  Ro-  4)  Ezek.  xiv.  14. 
manists,  Edinb.  1835,  p.  40-48.                         5)  James  v.  ]1. 

2)  1  Cor.  V.  12.  6)  Lukevii.9. 

3)  Job  i.  8. 


LECT.  VII.]       SCRIPTURE    MANIFESTATIONS    VERSUS    PRELACY.  167 

faith  ! '  and  upbraided  his  apostles  with  their  unbelief;'  yet  said 
to  a  woman  of  Canaan,  (who  would  not  be  discouraged  for  the 
objection  he  put  against  her,  of  her  not  being  within  the  pale 
of  the  church,  but  without,  among  the  dogs,)  'O  woman,  great 
is  thy  faith  !  '*  And  of  the  ten  healed,  there  was  but  one 
thankful,  '  and  he  was  a  Samaritan,'^  that  is,  a  schismatic,  a 
stranger,  as  Christ  here  calls  him,  and  said  to  him,  '  thy  faith 
hath  made  thee  whole.'*  And  the  pattern  of  charity  is  placed 
in  the  person  of  a  Samaritan,  in  opposition  to  both  a  priest  and 
a  Levite  :*  which  makes  good  what  St.  Peter  said  of  Cornelius 
a  Gentile,*  *  Of  a  truth  I  perceive  that  God  is  no  respecter  of 
persons ;  but  in  every  nation,  he  that  feareth  him,  and  worketh 
righteousness,  is  accepted  with  him.'  This  is  the  doctrine 
which  Christ  taught,®  when  he  reminded  the  Jews  that  a  widow 
of  Sarepta,  a  city  of  Sidon,  and  Naaman  the  Syrian,  were  pre- 
ferred to  all  the  widows  and  lepers  in  Israel ;  which  so  enraged 
the  Jews,  tenacious  of  the  privilege  of  the  church,  that  they 
'thrust  him  out  of  the  city,  and  led  him  unto  the  brow  of  the 
hill,  (whereon  their  city  was  built,)  that  they  might  cast  him 
down  headlong.'  And  it  is  said,  that  they  were  '  filled  with 
wrath.'  The  like  fury  they  showed  when  St.  Paul  told  them 
that  the  gospel  was  to  be  extended  beyond  the  pale  of  their 
church,  and  that  God  had  sent  him  to  the  Gentiles  :  '  And  they 
gave  him  audience  unto  that  word,  and  then  lift  up  their  voices, 
and  said.  Away  with  such  a  fellow  from  the  earth ;  for  it  is  not 
fit  that  he  should  live.  And  they  cried  out,  and  cast  off  their 
clothes,  and  threw  dust  into  the  air.'^  And  the  like  rage  is 
seen  among  the  zealots  of  your  church,  when  they  hear  of  the 
gospel  being  extended  out  of  the  pale  of  their  communion  ; 
though  to  christians,  who  hold  the  three  ancient  creeds,  and 
have  every  thing  essential  to  a  church,  except  what  Rome  has 
made  so,  viz.  the  universal  and  unlimited  sovereignty  of  her 
bishop :  which  is  the  great  bone  of  contention,  wherein  Rome 
stands  single  by  herself,  thrusting  all  other  christian  churches 
from  her ;  like  a  man  in  a  boat  who  thinks  he  thrusts  the  shore 
from  him,  whereas  he  only  thrusts  himself  from  the  shore  ; 
as  Firmilian  said  to  Stephen,  bishop  of  Rome — 'Do  not  de- 
ceive yourself — you  have  cut  yourself  off  from  the  church  ; 
for  he  is  truly  a  schismatic  who  has  made  himself  an  apostate 
from  the  communion  of  ecclesiastical  unity  ;  for,  while  you  think 

1)  Mark  xvi.  14.  5)  Luke  x.  30,  i&c. 

2)  Matt.  XV.  26,  28.  6)  Acts  x.  34. 

3)  Luke  xvii.  16.  7)  Luke  iv.  25,  «&c. 

4)  Luke  xvii.  18.  8)  Acts  xxii.  22 


168  SCRIPTURE    MANIFESTATIONS    VERSUS    PRELACY.       [lECT.    VII. 

you  can  excommunicate  all  other  churches  from  you,  you  have 
only  excommunicated  yourself  from  them.'  "> 

Now,  on  this  ground,  we  challenge  inquiry,  and  are  willing 
to  abide  the  issue.  What,  then,  is  the  conclusion,  as  to  the 
divine  purpose  towards  the  presbyterian  denominations  gener- 
ally, and  our  own  specially  ? 

The  fact  must  be,  either  that  there  is,  or  that  there  is  not, 
among  them  any  real  christians  and  heirs  of  heaven,  or  if  any, 
so  few  as  to  come  under  the  denomination,  if  we  may  so  speak, 
of  sporadic  or  miraculous  cases,  and  which  do  not,  therefore, 
conflict  with  the  general  rule,  that  upon  us  and  upon  our  chil- 
dren, no  dew  from  heaven,  nor  any  spiritual  gift,  grace,  or  bless- 
ing, ever  descends. 

Now,  although  it  is  unquestionably  true,  that  the  prelatic 
theory  does  necessarily  exclude  from  all  the  means  of  salvation, 
and  therefore,  from  their  result  —  that  is,  salvation  ;  —  all  who 
are  out  of  the  pale  of  the  church  ;  although  many  of  its  advo- 
cates insist  on  this  conclusion,  and  boldly  avow  it  —  yet  as  men's 
hearts  are  not,  after  all,  so  callous  as  are  ofttimes  their  abstract 
conclusions,  we  do  find  some  relentings  in  the  bosoms  of  even 
hio-h-churchmen.  Many,  therefore,  are  found  willing  to  admit  the 
claims,  personally  considered,  to  a  high  order  of  christian  char- 
acter and  piety,  of  numbers  "  among  presbyterians  at  least,  (I 
use  the  language  of  the  Oxford  tractators,)  whose  piety,  resigna- 
tion, cheerfulness  and  affection,  have  been  such,  under  trying  cir- 
cumstances, as  to  make  them  say  to  themselves,  on  the  thoughts 
of  their  own  higher  privileges,  '  Woe  unto  thee,  Chorazin,  woe 
unto  thee,  Bethsaida.'"^  Their  sympathies  thus  rise,  "against 
their  abstract  positions,"  and  forbid  that  they  "  should  be  so 
hard-hearted,  as  to  condemn,  by  wholesale,  the  multitudes  in 
various  sects  and  parties  whom  they  never  saw."^  This  con- 
clusion is  most  cordially  adopted  in  reference  to  multitudes 
among  us,  and  on  principle  and  conviction  too,  by  all  that  por- 
tion of  the  episcopal  denomination  who  are  usually  termed 
evano-elical  or  low-churchmen,  and  with  whom  we  can  most  cor- 
dially fraternize.  Such  episcopalians  feel  called  upon  to  in- 
dulge these  views,  because,  as  they  themselves  say,  to  use  the 
words  of  one  of  the  most  gifted  and  eloquent  of  their  divines, 
"  the  gospel  teaches  us  to  regard  all  who  give  proof  of  having 
received  favor  of  the  Lord,  as  his  true  followers — as  children 
of  the  same  father —  memJDers  of  the  same  family  —  clinging  to 

1)  Cyprian,  Ep.  75,  p.  228.  Edit.  Government,  p.  12,  13,  28,  29,  where 
Oxon.  i^  '3  distinctly  shown  that  persons  may 

2)  Oxf.  Tr.  vol.  1,  p.  334.  be  true  christians,  and  yet  out  of  the 

3)  Ibid,  and  also  Potter  on  Church  church. 


LECT.  Vll.]    SCRIPTURE    MANIFESTATIONS    VERSUS    PRELACY.  169 

one  cross  —  actuated  by  one  aim  —  animated  by  one   hope  — 
and  travelling  to  the  one  home.'" 

What  we  therefore  demand  is,  that  the  piety  of  those  who 
really  act  up  to  their  profession  in  the  judgment  of  even  their  fellow- 
members,  in  the  presbyterian  church,  should  be  brought  to  all 
the  tests  of  true  and  unfeigned  religion,  before  God  and  our 
Father;  and  that  like  the  gold  of  the  furnace,  it  should  be  therein 
tried  so  as  by  fire.  We  challenge  the  proof  of  our  christian  char- 
acter as  a  whole — for  we  claim  no  perfection,  but  eschew  all  such 
claims,  as  coming  from  a  deceived  heart  —  whether  that  char- 
acter be  according  to  godliness,  and  whether  we  be  in  the  faith. 
We  are  willing  to  give  a  reason  of  the  hope  that  is  in  us,  to  any 
man  who  will  ask  us  ;  and  to  square  our  experience  of  the  inward 
power  and  working  of  Christianity,  with  that  of  any  to  whom 
God  has  made  known  the  communication  of  his  grace.  To  God's 
word  we  implicitly  and  reverently  bow.  To  God's  will  we 
would  in  all  patience,  and  resigned  humility,  constantly  submit. 
To  God's  sovereign  mercy  in  Christ  Jesus,  who  is  the  Lord  our 
righteousness,  we  would  refer  all  our  hopes  and  all  our  desires  of 
salvation.  And,  by  the  grace  of  God,  anfl  not  by  any  thing  in 
us,  or  done  by  us,  would  we  most  thankfully  confess  we  have 
attained,  to  whatever  measure  of  the  stature  of  Christ,  we  have 
attained.  We  thus  offer  to  their  examination,  the  criteria  of 
our  individual  membership  in  the  kingdom  of  grace,  whatever 
may  be  the  criteria  of  the  true  visible  church.  This  latter  point 
we  know,  involves  many  intricate  questions  of  dark  and  ambig- 
uous meaning  —  involved  in  labyrinthine  and  misty  speculations, 
which  have  been  spun  out  into  webs  lighter  than  the  gossamer's, 
and  almost  invisible  to  the  most  microscopic  examiner. 

We,  therefore,  come  boldly  forward  into  open  daylight,  unfold 
our  credentials  and  our  experience  —  and  call  upon  them  to 
decide,  not  whether  we  are  true,  visible  churches,  but  whether 
we  are,  in  fact,  true  christians.  Now  we  rejoice,  that  charity  has 
here  triumphed  over  bigotry  and  intolerance,  and  that  our  mani- 
festation of  the  truth  is  allowed  by  many  to  give  "  such  proofs  of 
personal  discipleship,  as  are  not  to  be  questioned  without  impiety 
as  well  as  uncharitableness.'"^ 

This,  then,  being  the  unvarying  rule  of  practical  judgment  laid 
down  in  scripture,  by  which  all  men  shall  know  the  disciples  of 
Christ;  let  us  inquire,  is  the  presbyterian  church  — our  enemies 
themselves  being  judges  —  a  safe  church  in  which,  as  a  ves- 
sel destined  to  the  port  of  heaven,  men  may  adventure  the 
salvation   of  their  immortal  souls  ?     Now,   a  whole   cannot  be 

1)  Sermons    of  the    Rev.   Hucrh      also  Heber's  Sermons  in  England,  p. 
White,  of  Dublin,  vol.  i,  p.  243.     See     217,  223,  et  passim. 

2)  Anc't.  Christ,  vol.  i.  p.  489. 

22 


170  SCRIPTURE    MANIFESTATIONS    VERSUS    PRELACY.    [lECT.  VII. 

different  from  its  parts ;  so  that,  what  certainly  belongs  to  each 
of  its  parts,  and  is  inseparable  from  them,  does  not  belong  to  the 
whole  which  is  made  up  of  those  parts,  and  constituted  by  their 
union.  This  being  granted,  as  a  plain  axiomatic  proposition, 
we  then  proceed  to  its  application,  which  is  this.  The  individual 
members  of  this  church,  as  far  as  they  act  out  their  profession, 
and  thus  give  evidence  of 

"  Their  heaven-wrought  birth, 

Meekness,  love,  patience,  faith's  serene  repose,"'  — 

these  all,  either  are,  or  at  least  may  be,  true  christians,  and  in 
the  way  of  salvation,  and  destined  to  "  fill  the  thrones  of  heaven." 
For  if,  as  is  allowed  —  fully  allowed  —  many  are  thus  found, 
giving  incontestable  proofs,  that 

"  They  are  of  the  chosen  few, 
The  remnant  fruit  of  largely-scattered  grace, 
God  sows  in  waste,  to  reap  whom  he  foreknew 
Of  man's  old  race  ;"* 

then,  as  far  as  salvation  is  dependent  on  human  instrumentality, 
or  divine  sovereignty  —  such  might,  in  possibility,  be  the  happy 
experience  of  all.  It  follows,  as  a  necessary  consequence,  that 
the  church,  which  these  individuals  compose,  and  of  which  they 
are  the  members,  cannot  be  out  of  the  way  of  salvation,  or  situated 
beyond  the  limits  of  divine  grace  and  heavenly  promise.  It  may 
not  be,  THE  CHURCH  —  or  the  only  church  —  or  the  exclu- 
sively true  church  of  Jesus  Christ  —  and  such  we  never  wish, 
nor  desire  that  it  should  be  ;  but  blessed  be  God,  it  may  be,  a 
CHURCH  OF  Christ,  a  true,  and  pure,  and  faithful  branch  of  ihat 
one,  universal,  holy,  and  apostolic  church,  of  which  Christ  is  head, 
and  all  we  are  members. 

To  deny  this  conclusion,  from  such  premises,  is  not  any  better 
than  to  argue  that  a  province  or  state  is  in  rebellion,  and  its 
inhabitants,  as  a  body,  justly  and  deservedly  held  and  treated  as 
traitors;  while  at  the  same  time,  each  single  inhabitant  is,  in  his 
own  person,  a  faithful  and  loyal  subject,  although  indeed,  some 
may  decline  wearing  a  particular  badge  which  some  dominant 
party  would  enforce  as  a  necessary  sign  of  loyalty.^  To  claim 
such  universal,  and  exclusive  dominion,  in  such  a  spirit  of  dicta- 
tion, is  to  impress  schism  upon  the  forefront  of  the  claimant 
body.  It  is  spiritual  despotism,  founded  on  a  baseless  assump- 
tion of  authority  never  given,  and  rights  never  vested.*  "Out  of 

1)  Lyra  Apostolica,  p.  67,  by  the  who  resembles  it  to  "the  fashion  of 
Oxford  divines,  or  their  coadjutors.  their  arms." 

2)  Ibid,  p.  6b.  4)  See  it  denounced  as  antichris- 

3)  That  in  this  figure  I  do  not  tian,  and  antisocial,  by  a  Romanist 
lower  our  denominational  distinctions,  quoted  in  Hough's  Reply  as  above,  p. 
Bee  Ueber's  Sermons  on  Eng.,  p.  223,  111. 


LECT.   VII. i    SORIPTDKE    MANll'KSTATlONS    VERSUS    PRELACY.  171 

the  church,  there  is  no  ordinary  salvation" — grant  it.  But  who 
—  ^vhat —  where  is  the  church  ?  and  who  is  entitled  to  set  up  the 
boundary  lines,  and  to  say  to  the  insulted  Spirit  of  God  —  thus 
far  mayest  thou  go  but  no  further  ?  "  Out  of  the  church"  —  and 
who  are  thus  out?  "Is  it,"  it  has  been  asked,  "those  whom 
Hildebrand  may  have  excommunicated,  or  whom  Gregory  the 
Great  may  have  cursed,  or  whom  Syricus  may  have  condemned, 
or  whom  Liricus,  or  Stephen,  or  Sextus  may  have  denounced  as 
heretics  and  schismatics  ?"  —  or  is  it  those,  whom  Romanists  and 
Anglicans  consign  to  the  hopelessness  of  that  forged  figment  of 
the  schools,  God's  uncovenanted  mercies?  Nay,  we  are  taught, 
even  by  Archbishop  Potter^  that  we  may  be  unjustly  excommu- 
nicated, and  still  be  in  communion  with  Christ  the  head,  and  of 
course,  with  all  his  living  members.  And  it  is  by  claiming  the 
benefit  of  this  very  principle — just,  and  merciful,  and  true  — 
that  the  Church  of  England  herself  confidently  hopes  to  bear 
unscathed  the  anathemas  of  "  her  dear  sister  Rome."* 

These  prelatic,  and  exclusive,  claims  to  the  possession  of 
the  plenitude  of  grace  ;  and  of  sacraments  exclusively  effica- 
cious; are  shivered  and  broken,  by  the  admission,  that  without 
and  beyond  the  church,  and  within  the  pale  of  other  commu- 
nions, the  gifts  and  calling  of  God  are  freely  and  fully  bestowed. 
Grant  but  this,  —  as  reason,  charity,  and  the  most  plain,  pal- 
pable, and  undeniable  facts  require,  —  and  such  views  are 
self-contradictory,  and  in  plain  opposition  to  the  evident  mani- 
festations of  the  divine  presence.  They  are  sheer  absurdities, 
as  well  as  gross  impieties.  It  is  as  if  a  company  of  men,  for  the 
purpose  of  building  up  some  village  or  town  in  an  opposite  lo- 
cation, should  asseverate  of  an  existing  town,  that  its  situation 
was  essentially  and  necessarily  fatal,  and  must  prove  destructive 
to  the  lives  of  all  who  venture  to  reside  within  its  limits ;  while, 
at  the  same  time,  the  most  general  health  prevails  through  the 
community,  and  every  inhabitant  speaks  in  praise  of  the  salu- 
brity of  the  atmosphere,  and  the  delightfulness  of  the  climate. 
There  is,  then,  no  alternative.  Consistency  demands  the  sac- 
rifice, and  it  must  be  made.  The  church  —  the  church  is 
to  be  preserved,  and  for  her  a  stern  denial  must  be  given  to  all 
love,  charity,  sympathy,  and  kindness. 

There  is  no  way  left,  therefore,  but  to  stand  firm  and  im- 
movable in  the  assumption — the  temple  of  the  Lord — the 
temple  of  the  Lord,  are  we,  —  to  deny  the  operations  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  wherever  else  they  may  be  witnessed  ;  —  to  reject 
as  spurious,  fanatical,  and  unsound,  all  extraneous  evidences  of 


1)  On  Ch.  Gov.  p.  38,  29  2)  Seee.  g.  Oxf.  Tr.  vol.  i.  p 


136. 


172  SCRIPTURE    MANIFESTATIONS    VERSUS    PRELACY.    [LECT.  VII. 

piety  and  grace  ;  —  and  to  consign  to  deserved  perdition,  the 
millions  of  schismatic  and  rebellious  outcasts,  who  will  not  go 
to  heaven   under  prelatic  orders. 

"  Oh  fools,  to  dream  of  showing  mercy, — 
Arm  earth,  hell,  heaven,  'gainst  their  ungodly  cause, 
And  sweep  them  to  the  appointed  pit  of  hell."' 

But  in  either  case  —  take  which  alternative  they  may  —  the 
advocates  of  this  doctrine  of  prelatic  apostolical  succession,  as 
the  conveyancer  of  heavenly  grace  —  are  involved  in  inextrica- 
ble perplexity  and  absurdity. 

Do  they  admit,  as  many  do,  and  as  Archbishop  Potter  teaches, 
that  it  is  not  easy  to  give  a  distinct  and  certain  account  what 
were  the  particular  offices  of  these  persons,  (the  orders  of  the 
church;)  and  which  of  them  were  extraordinary  and  temporary, 
and  which  designed  for  the  constant  and  lasting  use  of  the 
church  ;  since  the  scriptures  do  not  speak  clearly,  and  learned 
men  have  differed  in  their  judgments  about  them  ;"' — then  is  it 
assuredly  certain,  that  scripture  does  not  authenticate  the  pre- 
latic claims  to  a  transcendency  of  power  and  privilege. 

Do  they,  on  the  other  hand,  admit  that  the  fact  of  our  personal 
Christianity,  as  exhibited  in  the  lives  and  character  of  multitudes 
among  us,  is  manifest,  with  a  clearness  not  to  be  gainsayed  ; 
and  stands,  therefore,  upon  evidence  incomparably  stronger  than 
can  be  given  for  their  exclusive  pretensions  to  be  the  only  true 
church?  —  then  do  they,  equally,  overthrow  their  own  position, 
since  it  is  by  the  combination  of  such  christians,  our  churches 
are  made  up  ;  and  since  there  is  in  their  Christianity  a  demon- 
stration of  the  presence  and  power  of  Christ  within  them,  to 
save,  to  sanctify,  and  bless. 

Or  will  our  opponents  break  away  from  every  restraint  of 
charity,  and  sear,  as  with  a  hot  iron,  the  bowels  of  compassion, 
that  stir  and  agitate  their  hearts  with  compunctious  visitings  of 
kindness ;  and  will  they  boldly  pronounce  the  doom  of  the  vast 
and  growing  majority  of  protestant  Christendom  ?  —  then  must  we 
leave  them,  like  Acetius,  "  to  climb  alone  into  heaven  by  their 
own  ladder,"  to  sit  down  upon  its  thrones,  and  wield  its  scep- 
tres.—  We  may,  however,  still  be  permitted,  and  thanks  be  to 
God,  by  whose  gracious  providence  we  are  —  to  throw  ourselves 
into  his  hands,  and,  as  we  desire  to  know  and  to  do  only  his 
will,  so  to  hope  that  every  door  is  not  shut  against  us,  and  that 

1)  Milman's  Anne  Boleyn,   vol.  2)    Potter  on    Ch.    Gov.    p.  93, 

iii.  p.  28.  See  also  pp.  97, 91, 92,  also,  pp.  85,  86, 

That  this  consequence  is  inevitable,     88. 
■ee  urged  in  Anc't.Christ'y.Tol.i.p.490. 


LECT.  Vll.]    SCRIPTURE    MANIFESTATIONS    VERSUS    PRELACY.  173 

this  merciful  and  holy  God  hath  not  so  stated  our  case,  as  to 
reduce  us  to  the  necessity  of  sinning  against  conscience,  en- 
lightened by  his  word,  in  order  to  escape  from  a  state  of  dam- 
nation ;  or  that  our  crime,  if  it  is  a  crime,  is  so  inexpiable,  that 
nothing  less  than  our  eternal  ruin  can  satisfy  for  it.'  Truly  we 
may  say,  with  St.  Augustine,  although  he  himself  assisted  pow- 
erfully in  forging  fetters  for  the  future  officers  of  the  Inquisition 
— "  Misericordia  Dei  liberam  esse  voluit,  servilibus  oneribus  pre- 
munt,  ut  tolerabilior  sit  conditio  Judaeorum,  qui  etiamsi  tem- 
pus  libertatis  non  agnoverint,  legalibus  tamen  sarcinis,  non 
humanis  presumptionibus  subjiciuntur."*  "  For  one  institu- 
tion of  God's,"  says  he,  "  there  are  ten  of  men's  ;  and  their 
presumptuous  devices  are  more  vigorously  pressed  than  the 
divine  prescripts  —  whereby  the  state  of  christians  was  rendered 
far  more  intolerable  than  theirs  under  the  law  ;  their  impositions 
being  from  the  pleasure  of  God,  but  these  from  the  will  of  pre- 
sumptuous men,  enthralling  that  religion  which  God,  in  mercy, 
would  have  had  free." 

After  all,  then,  supposing  this  whole  doctrine  to  be  true  in 
theory,  of  what  value  is  it  ?  —  since  it  is  not  found  true  in  actu- 
ality. God  is  not  more  their  God  than  our  God  —  nor  Christ 
their  Saviour  more  than  ours  —  nor  the  Spirit  more  their  sancti- 
fier  than  our  sanctifier  —  nor  the  promises  more  richly  fulfilled 
in  their  experience  than  in  ours  —  nor  does  salvation  come  of 
their  church  more  than  it  cometh  of  our  own^  —  and  it  is,  says 
WicklifFe,  "  a  thousandfold  more  grace  to  be  a  minister  as 
Christ  has  ordained,  and  by  grace  that  God  himself  giveth,  than 
to  be  a  pope  or  other  prelate."'' 

But  little  as  the  doctrine  may  be  worth,  even  for  the  purpose 
of  aggrandizing  one  denomination,  and  of  humbling  others  ;  the 
guilt  which  is  involved  in  this  appropriation  to  one  particular 
and  visible  church,  of  those  privileges  and  rights,  which  are  the 
patrimony  of  the  church  universal — this  guilt  is  not  light,  nor 
will  its  authors  be  held  excusable  by  Him,  who  is  the  common 
Father  of  us  all.  "  I  know  not,"  says  Bishop  Heber,  "  any  su- 
periority, except  that  of  truth,  which  one  religious  sect  has  a 
right,  as  such,  to  demand  over  another,  and  I  am  confident  that 
truth,  wherever  that  is  found,  cannot  be  more  effectually  for- 
warded, than  by  the  friendly  intercourse,  in  good  works,  of 
those  who  conscientiously  differ."^ 

1)  See  Howe's  Reply  to  Stilling-  3)  See  Anc't.  Christianity,  vol.  i. 
fleet's  Sermon  on  the  Mischief  of  Sep-      p.  4SG,  492. 

aration,  in  Wks.  vol.  iv.  pp.  422,  440.  4)  See  in  Brit.  Ref.  vol.  i.  p.  221. 

2)  See    the    whole    passage    in  5)  Sermons  in  England,  p.  217  and 
Epist.  119,  Januario,  cap.  19.                     p.  223.  "  Who,"  asks  Dr.  Rice,  in  his 


174 


WHAT    WE    MUST    DEMAND, 


[LECT.  VII. 


To  substantiate  any  other  claims  than  these,  whose  validity 
depends  on  the  manifestation  of  an  unbroken  line  of  personal 
successors  from  the  apostles,  we  require  to  have  exhibited  to 
us,  not  the  last  footsteps  in  this  march  of  onward  progression  — 
but  their  continuance  through  the  recesses  of  that  unfathomed 
darkness  which  lies  in  the  remote  ages  of  the  past ;  and  their  sure 
termination  in  the  person  of  the  Son  of  God,  The  rigid  uni- 
formity of  every  movement  must  be  ascertained  and  made  clear 
by  observation.  It  must  be  demonstrated  that  no  break,  or  in- 
formality, nor  the  absence  of  any  necessary  element,  in  the 
working  out  of  the  countless  experiments,  by  which  this  myste- 
rious agency  has  been  elicited  and  transmitted  ;  has  ever  oc- 
curred, to  mar  its  progress,  in  any  portion  of  its  traceable 
course.  And  when  this  has  been  made  apparent,  of  every  step 
in  the  ascending  or  descending  series ;  we  then  demand,  that 
the  establishment  of  this  divine  right,  by  the  appointment  of 
the  only  King  in  Zion,  shall  be  made  equally  sure.  Nothing 
short  of  this  will  satisfy  us.  For,  it  is  not  a  question  of  mere 
ancestral  pedigree,  whereby  the  pride  and  vanity  of  some  anti- 
quated family  are  to  be  gratified  ;  and  when  we  are  fully  satis- 
fied to  look  upon  their  genealogical  tree,  with  all  its  well-mark- 
ed limbs  and  branches.  But  that,  surely,  must  be  a  chain  of 
adamant,  and  safe  anchored  within  the  vail, —  on  which  is  to  be 
made  dependent  the  destinies  of  millions.     And  that  pedigree 


Review  of  Bishop  Ravenscroft,  (Evan. 
and  Lit.  Mag.,  vol.  ix.  p.  547,)  "  can 
perceive  any  difference  in  the  minis- 
trations of  religious  teachers,  arising 
from  a  difference  in  their  ordination  ? 
What  visible  difference  in  the  effect 
of  their  labors .''  A  pious,  zoalous 
episcopalian  preaches  the  gospel ;  sin- 
ners are  converted;  the  faithful  are 
edified ;  the  afflicted  are  comforted. 
A  presbyterian  preaches  the  same 
truths,  and  the  same  effects  follow. 
No  man  in  the  world  can  point  out 
the  smallest  difference  between  the 
penitence,  the  faith,  the  love,  the 
hope,  the  comfort,  produced  by  the 
instrumentality  of  these  different 
preachers.  The  character  of  holiness 
formed  by  the  truth  in  each  case  is, 
as  far  as  it  goes,  precisely  the  same 
character.  Yet  Bishop  R.  and  his 
brethren  of  the  high-church,  would 
wish  us  to  believe  that  there  is  a  most 
material  difference  in  these  two  cases, 
arising  solely  from  this  fact,  that  one 
preacher  was  ordained  by  a  diocesan 
bishop,  and  the  other  by  a  presbytery. 


The  converts  made  by  the  instru- 
mentality of  the  presbyterian,  believe 
the  doctrine,  because  it  is  Christ's 
doctrine ;  rely  on  the  promises,  be- 
cause they  were  made  by  Christ;  re- 
ceive the  sacraments,  because  they 
were  instituted  by  Christ;  cherish  the 
hope  of  salvation,  because  it  is  war- 
ranted by  the  truth  which  Christ  has 
revealed,  and  the  work  which  Christ 
has  wrought  by  his  spirit ;  yet  this 
hope  is  unscriptural,  because,  forsooth, 
his  religious  teacher  has  not  received 
a  character  of  authority  transmitted 
through  bishops  and  popes  for  l&iOO 
years.  Whereas  the  episcopalian,  who 
exercises  the  same  repentance,  the 
same  faith,  the  same  love,  and  no 
more;  who  receives  the  sacraments 
as  signs  and  seals  of  the  same  cove- 
nant of  grace,  and  cherishes  precisely 
the  same  hope  of  salvation,  has  the 
warrant  of  heaven  for  all,  because  his 
religious  instructer  has  the  character 
of  authority  !  Pretensions  like  these 
stumble  belief — create  offence  — 
and  awaken  suspicion." 


LECT.  VII.]  AN    APPEAL    TO    PRELATISTS.  175 

must  surely  be  legally  attested,  which  is  to  wrest,  from  its  present 
claimants,  a  long-possessed,  and  dearly-bought  inheritance,  se- 
cured to  them  by  blood. 

You,  (we  address  this  prelatic  church,)  you  arrest  the  angel 
having  the  everlasting  gospel  to  preach  unto  all  nations,  and 
charge  him  to  proclaim  it  to  those  only,  who  will  receive  it,  as 
interpreted  by  your  decisions.  You  hush  the  sounds  wliich 
warble  from  the  angelic  choir,  who  announce,  in  rapturous  exul- 
tation, a  Saviour  who  is  a  propitiation  for  the  sins  of  the  whole 
world  ;  and  you  require  that  they  shall  celebrate  a  Saviour 
whose  blood  is  efficacious  only  for  all  prelalists.  You  imprison 
that  light  of  heaven  which  was  designed,  in  the  overflowing 
munificence  of  its  bounty,  to  enlighten  all  men  ;  and  would 
thicken  into  deeper  gloom  that  darkness,  which  already  en- 
shrouds man's  rugged  and  hopeless  path.  Now,  surely,  in  so 
doing,  you  can  direct  us  to  that  voice  from  heaven,  by  which 
such  supernatural  authority  has  been  committed  into  your  irre- 
sponsible hands?  Why,  then,  is  it,  that,  as  we  urge  on  our 
way  through  the  pages  of  the  New  Testament,  we  find,  as  we 
close  book  after  book,  that,  whatever  else  it  may  contain,  and 
whatever  other  information  it  may  convey,  it  contains  not,  and 
conveys  not,  this  grant,  so  unspeakably  important,  desirable,  and 
necessary,  your  doctrine  being  true  ?  And  why  is  it,  that,  in 
support  of  these  claims,  as  we  have  already  seen  by  the  testi- 
mony, even  of  their  defenders,  there  is  not  a  word  of  clear  and 
distinct  revelation,  so  that  they  are  inferrible  at  all,  only  by 
them,  in  whose  favor  they  are  boldly  set  forth  ? 

"  Whether  these  episcopoiy"  says  the  author  of  what  has  been 
termed,  by  the  Edinburgh  Review,  "the  most  original,  compre- 
hensive, and  profound  contribution,  which  any  living  writer,  in 
our  own  country,  has  made  to  the  science  of  ecclesiastical  poli- 
ty"— after  going  through  an  analysis  of  the  New  Testament^ — 
"  whether  they  all  ruled  with  equal  power,  or  submitted  to  the 
guidance  of  a  senior,  or  president ;  we  are  not  told."  '•'  The 
present  constitution  of  the  church,  although  it  emanated  from 
the  apostles,  is,"  says  Mr.  Dodwell,  one  of  the  most  renowned 
champions  of  prelacy,  "more  recent  than  all  the  writings  of 
the  New  Testament,  and  is  not  to  be  expected  to  be  found 
there. "2  This  writer  also  denies  that  any  of  the  apostles  had  a 
successor  but  Judas  the  traitor.^  Bishop  Davenant,  also,  and 
multitudes    more   in   the  Church   of  England,    deny  that   the 

1)  Isaac  Taylor  on  Spiritual  Des-  Ch.  Gov.  p.  98.     See  also  Mr.  Rhind, 
potism,  p.  444.  on  ihid. 

2)  Paroenes,  Lecture  xiii.  p.  54  3)  Paroenes,  Lee.  vi.  p.  2.     Lee. 
See  in  Anderson's  Defence  of  Pres.  xv.  p.  62.    See  xvi.  p.  68. 


176  PRELACY    CLEARLY    OVERTHROWN.  [lECT.  VII. 

apostles,  as  such,  had  any  successors.'  The  Romish  church, 
also,  expressly  contradicts  this  theory,  and  affirms,  as  a  doctrine 
fundamental  to  the  salvation  even  of  Anglican  prelates,  and  of 
the  substance  of  the  faith,  that  of  all  the  apostles,  not  one  had  a 
lineal  successor,  save  and  except  only  Peter,  and  that  in  the  pa- 
pal chair.  "  The  apostles  "  says  Mr.  Dodwell  "  ordained  no 
bishops  but  presbyters  only."  Nay,  says  Dr.  Hammond,  an  au- 
thority equally  strong,  "  the  apostles  at  first  ordained  no  mere 
presbyters,  but  bishops  only."^  Thus  is  it  certain,  as  Arch- 
bishop Potter  declares,  that  "  the  scriptures  do  not  speak  clearly, 
and  learned  men  have  differed  in  their  judgments  about"  the 
whole  matter.^ 

But  how  is  this,  when  the  principles  of  church  government 
came  directly  within  the  sphere  of  the  apostolic  writers,  and 
when,  if  there  is  any  thing,  (prelacy  being  true,)  on  which  we 
should  have  expected  full  and  accurate  and  indubious  legis- 
lation, this  is  that  very  subject  ?  For  the  apostles  being  in- 
spired by  Christ,  to  write  what  would  be  necessary,  not  only  for 
the  churches  as  then  existing,  but  as  they  were  designed  ever  to 
remain  ;  and  thus  prospectively  to  instruct  us  on  whom  the  ends 
of  the  world  have  come  ;  it  is  impossible  to  believe  they  could 
have  left  this  whole  doctrine,  essential  as  it  is  declared  to  be, 
in  such  confessed  ambiguity  and  silence.  Since,  then,  this  doc- 
trine of  apostolic  succession  is  not  found  drawn  out  in  the 
ecclesiastical  records,  canons,  or  decretals  of  the  inspired  writers; 
the  only  legislators  of  Christ's  church  —  it  is  not  —  it  cannot 
be  —  and  it  is  sinful  to  make  it  appear  to  be  —  a  doctrine  of 
God's  word,  or  essential  to  the  salvation  of  men. 

Mr.  Leslie,  indeed,  has  ventured  to  declare  that  by  the  appli- 
cation of  his  four  celebrated  rules,  there  is  given  an  infallible 
demonstration  of  prelacy."  But  if  his  infallible  demonstration 
proves  any  thing,  it  proves  its  utter  unscripturality.  For  that 
the  system  of  prelacy  was  publicly  instituted  in  the  face  of  the 
world,  which  is  one  of  these  rules,  either  by  Christ  or  his  apos- 
tles, is  a  petitio  principii,  assuming  as  undeniable  what  we  most 
confidently  dispute  ;  since  for  any  thing  like  satisfactory  evi- 
dence of  this  fact,  the  world  has  yet  to  wait.  Neither  can  it 
be  shown  that  during  the  first  ages  of  the  church,  the  system  of 
diocesan  prelacy  was  attested  by  public  monuments,  or  by  out- 
ward and  unquestionable  acts.  None  such  are  to  be  found  in 
the  apostolic  or  primitive  age  of  the  church.     And,  although  we 

1)  See  Lecture  x.  3)    The   Oxford     tractatnrs,    we 

2)  See  Diss.  Cap.  19,20,21,22.  showed,  give  up  scripture  as  to  any 
Vind.  of  chap.  ii.  Annot.  on  Acts  clear  evidence.  See  Potter;  also  at  pp. 
lib,  and  14  a.     See   Anderson,  Def.  107,109,110. 

of  Presb.  p.  112.  4)  Letter    on    Epis.    in    Scholar 

Armed,  vol.  i.  p.  56. 


LECT.  VII.]  PRESBYTERY   DEMONSTRATED.  177 

must  allow  that  such  a  system  has  existed  from  a  later  period  in 
the  greatest  portion  of  Christendom,  yet  do  we  deny  that  it  can 
be  shown  to  have  commenced  from  the  time  of  Christ,  which  is 
yet  made  essentially  necessary  by  Mr.  Leslie's  fourth  rule.' 

But  on  the  other  hand,  that  an  order  of  ministers  have  ex- 
isted in  the  church,  from  the  very  time  of  Christ,  is  plain  and 
undeniable.  And  that  presbyters,  as  an  order  of  christian  minis- 
ters, have  thus  existed,  and  have  been  perpetuated  in  the  church, 
is  also  allowed  ;  for,  as  most  prelatists  teach,  the  apostles  were 
certainly  of  this  order  during  our  Lord's  ministry  —  and  others 
expressly  so  denominated  were  afterwards  appointed  to  succeed 
them  in  the  christian  ministry.  By  these  famous  rules,  there- 
fore, of  Mr.  Leslie's,  we  have  an  infallible  disproof  of  the  ex- 
clusive claims  of  prelacy,  and  an  infallible  demonstration  of  the 
truth  of  a  presbyterian  ministry. 

Our  conclusion,  therefore,  is,  that  prelacy  has  no  foundation 
in  the  word  of  God.  It  has  never  been  mentioned,  or  alluded 
to,  by  Christ,  except  it  be  in  those  passages  where  its  essential 
spirit  is  most  pointedly  condemned.  Nor  has  he  left  a  com- 
mission for  any  but  one  order  of  christian  ministers,  to  the  end 
of  time.  And  as  he  employed  only  one  order  of  ministers, 
under  the  same  commission,  with  the  same  powers,  and  for  the 
same  objects,  during  his  life  ;  so  must  we  certainly  conclude  that 
the  church,  under  Christ,  was  presbyterian,  and  not  prelatical; 
Christ  still  being  regarded  by  presbyterians  as  presiding  over 
his  church  and  ministers,  with  the  same  authority  as  when  visi- 
bly manifest  in  the  flesh.  Neither  is  prelacy  laid  down  by  the 
apostles,  the  next  master-builders  of  the  christian  church. 
They  never  mention  three  orders  of  bishops,  priests,  and  dea- 
cons. They  always  interchange  the  titles  and  offices  of  bish- 
ops and  presbyters.  They  ascribe  to  presbyters  all  the  powers 
now  properly  claimed  by  prelates.  These  powers  were  exer- 
cised by  presbyters,  and  with  their  sanction,  even  during  the 
life-time  of  the  apostles.  The  churches  established  by  them, 
were  placed  under  the  superintendence  and  government  of  a 
council  of  presbyters.  They,  themselves,  received  ordination 
at  the  hands  of  presbyters.     And  while  they  are  never  called 

1)  The  scriptures,  says  Mr.  (af-  of  Rome,  was  there  in  the  year   34. 

terwards   bishop)    Lowth,  furnish    us  See  Defence  of  Remarks  on  a  Sermon 

with  two  remarkable   periods  of  time,  by   William   Lowth,  B.    D.,  by  John 

from  whence    we   may  date  the   insti-  Norman,    of    Portsmouth.       London, 

tution  of  the    episcopal   government.  1724,    p.  25;    in   Boston   Athenaeimi, 

The  first  commences  from   St.  Paul's  B.   121.     While  the   original  of  pres- 

release    from     his    imprisonment    at  byters  is  therefore  clear  and  certain, 

Rome,    when      Timothy    was     made  even  the  warmest  advocates  of  prelacy 

bishop  of  Ephesus,  &c.,  i.  e.  about  G3,  cannot  agree  upon  any  time  when  its 

and  yet  James,  the  pretended  bishop  first  introduction  took  place. 

23 


178  PRESBYTERY   DEMONSTRATED.  [lECT.  VII. 

bishops,  they  are  identified  with  presbyters,  in  their  ordinary 
and  perpetual  ministerial  character,  with  whom  they  sat,  as  co- 
members,  in  the  same  synodical  assembly.  The  church,  there- 
fore, as  it  existed  under  apostolic  regimen,  was  presbyterian, 
and  not  prelatic. 

Nothing  like  a  definite  and  express  testimony,  in  favor  of 
these  prelatic  claims,  can  be  produced  from  any  portion  of 
the  New  Testament ;  nor  any  other  evidence,  unless  it  be  of 
that  analogical  and  inferential  kind,  which  prelatists  themselves 
teach  us  to  reject ;  while  we  are,  every  where,  in  this  word  of 
God,  warned  against  the  encroachments  of  this  very  system,  as 
it  should,  "  by  degrees,"  {^paulatim)  make  its  way  to  its  present 
established  claims,  prerogatives,  and  powers.  But,  on  the  other 
hand,  we  have  clear  and  evident  testimony  from  scripture,  for 
every  essential  feature  of  the  presbyterian  system. 

That  presbyters  are  a  divinely  appointed  order  of  christian 
ministers,  who  ever  have  continued,  and  will  continue  to  the 
end  of  time,  never  has  been  questioned.  That  these  presby- 
ters have  ascribed  to  them,  in  the  word  of  God,  all  the  rights 
and  powers  included  under  ordination  and  jurisdiction,  cannot  be 
reasonably  doubted.  (See  1  Thess.  v.  12  with  17  ;  1  Tim.  v. 
17  ;  Heb.  xiii.  7,  17  ;  1  Cor.  v.  13;  1  Tim.  iv.  14;  3  John 
ix. ;  Titus  iii.  10.)  These  powers  were  not  only  exercised 
upon  the  apostles  by  presbyters,  and  by  presbyters  during  the 
lives  of  the  apostles,  but  were  also  committed  to  them  by  the 
apostles  in  their  last  farewells,  as  to  the  highest  officers  in  the 
church ;  and  as  their  proper  successors  in  the  government  of 
the  church.  (See  Acts  xx.  25,  27,  28,  29;  1  Pet.  v.  1—4, 
with  2  Pet.  i.  13,  14.) 

That  the  ministers  of  the  churches  should  be  elected  to  their 
office  in  those  churches,  by  the  suffi-ages  of  the  members,  and 
not  by  any  prelatic,  or  close  corporation  of  vestry-men ;  is 
another  title-deed  which  the  ministers  of  the  presbyterian 
church  can  produce — which  scripture  makes  necessary — and 
which  prelatical  ministers  have  not.  (See  Acts  i.  15,  16,21 — 
23;  Acts  vi.  3  ;  Acts  xiv.  23  ;  and  2  Cor.  viii.  19,  16.) 

And  thus  might  we  proceed  to  show  our  divine  warrant,  for 
presbyterial  and  synodical  assemblies,  and  for  other  features  of 
our  scriptural  system.  But  enough  has  been  said  to  make  it 
clear,  how  indubitably  certain  it  is,  that  the  church  of  Christ, 
when  tested  by  scripture,  and  fashioned  after  the  pattern  of 
God,  is  presbyterian,  and  not  prelatic;  and  that  this  doctrine  of 
prelatical  apostolical  succession,  when  tested  by  scripture,  must 
be  condemned. 

In  fine,  therefore,  we  may  say  of  the  attempts   to  rest  this 


LECT.  VII.]  HOOKER  VERSUS  PRELACY.  179 

prelatic  doctrine  upon  the  basis  of  God's  word,  what  Hooker 
says  of  the  tenets  he  controverts.  "  Howbeit,  examine,  sift, 
and  resolve  their  alleged  proofs,  till  you  come  to  the  very  root 
from  whence  they  spring,  the  heart,  wherein  their  strength  lieth ; 
and  it  shall  clearly  appear  unto  any  man  of  judgment,  that  the 
most,  which  can  be  inferred  upon  such  plenty  of  divine  testimo- 
nies, is  only  this,  —  that  some  things  which  they  maintain,  as  far 
as  some  men  can  probably  conjecture,  do  seem  to  have  been  out 
of  scripture  not  absurdly  gathered.  Is  this  a  warrant  suffi- 
cient for  any  man's  conscience,  to  build  such  proceedings  upon, 
as  have  been,  and  are,  put  in  use  for  the  establishment  of  that 
cause  ?  " 

1)  Works,  vol.  i.  p.  187,  Hanbury's  ed. 


LECTURE  VIII. 


THE    PRELATICAL   DOCTRINE    OF    APOSTOLICAL    SUCCESSION    BROUGHT 
TO    THE    TEST    OF    HISTORY. 

We  have  been  engaged  in  an  examination  of  the  prelatic  doc- 
trine of  apostolical  succession.  We  say,  the  prelatic  doctrine  of 
apostolic  succession,  because,  as  we  hope  to  show,  there  is  a  view 
of  this  doctrine  which  is  scriptural,  reasonable,  and  of  great  mo- 
ment. There  is  no  other  foundation  on  which  true  Christianity 
can  rest,  than  the  doctrine  of  apostles  and  prophets ;  and  only 
they  who  remain  steadfast  in  holding  the  truth  can  be  regarded 
as  the  legitimate  successors  of  these  founders  of  the  christian 
church.  This  scriptural  view  of  the  doctrine  of  succession, 
breaks  down  all  middle  walls  of  partition  —  rejects  as  Judaical, 
the  separation  of  the  christian  temple  into  outer  and  inner  courts, 
of  greater  and  less  privilege  and  sacredness  —  merges  all  dis- 
tinctions, except  such  as  are  necessary  to  the  government  of  the 
church,  into  the  brotherhood  of  one  heavenly  family  —  and  allows 
no  other  diflferences  than  such  as  arise  from  the  manifestations 
of  the  truth,  and  the  zealous  discharge  of  christian  obligation. 
There  is  thus  conferred  precedence  upon  none.  None  are  by 
birth,  inheritance,  or  the  monopoly  of  some  exclusive  charter, 
invested  with  the  privileges  of  the  christian  church.  The  church 
is  a  house  of  prayer  for  all  nations.  The  promise  is  to  believers, 
and  to  their  children  —  to  them  that  are  near,  and  to  them  that 
are  afar  off;  so  that  should  any  particular  church  become  apostate 
—  deny  the  truth  —  and  yet  say,  "  we  have  Abraham  for  our 
father," — ours  are  the  promises  and  the  oracles  of  God,  and  the 
priesthood  and  the  succession  —  God  is  still  able  of  those  who 
are  esteemed,  by  such  pharisees,  graceless  as  the  stones  of  the 


182  WHAT    HAS    BEEN   PROVED.  [lECT.  VIII. 

valley,  to  raise  up  children  unto  Abraham,  and   to  send  them 
ministers  after  his  own  heart. 

The  prelatic  doctrine  of  apostolic  succession  represents  the 
spiritual  interests  of  the  whole  human  family,  as  intrusted  by 
God,  to  one  visible  corporation  —  the  church  ;  to  which,  for  this 
end,  is  committed  a  plenary  authority,  to  draw  at  will  upon  the 
divine  treasury.  —  This  power  or  gift  is  a  personal  right,  vested 
in  each  successor  of  the  apostles,  by  the  imposition  of  prelatic 
hands  ;  and  has  been  transmitted  —  as  it  could  not  otherwise 
have  been  transmitted  at  all  —  in  an  unbroken  line  of  prelates 
from  Christ  to  this  present  hour.  Beyond  the  jurisdiction  of 
this  body,  in  w^hich  Christ  resides,  there  can  be  no  spiritual 
safety  or  happiness. 

We  have  exhibited  this  doctrine  in  the  language  of  its  advo- 
cates. We  have  also,  by  their  assistance,  laid  down  the  canons, 
by  which  the  evidence  presented  must  be  tried.  And  we  have 
brought  the  whole  question  to  the  test  of  scripture.  The  posi- 
tion has,  we  trust,  been  abundantly  established,  that  a  doctrine 
which  is  made  essential,  and  of  the  substance  of  the  faith,  must 
appear  to  have  been  clearly  and  certainly  revealed  in  scripture.' 
Now,  by  the  confession  even  of  its  advocates,  this  doctrine  is  not 
thus  to  be  found  —  if  found  at  all  —  in  the  word  of  God.  It 
was  also  shown,  that  in  order  to  give  validity  to  these  high 
claims,  it  is  needful,  not  only  to  make  manifest  the  fact,  that 
such  a  system  was  acted  upon  by  the  apostles,  in  their  adminis- 
tration of  the  affairs  of  the  first  churches,  but  that  they  insti- 
tuted such  a  system  as  the  perpetual  and  unalterable  order  of 
the  church.  Of  this  we  have  discovered  no  evidence  whatever, 
nor  can  such  evidence  be  produced. 

Further:  it  was  made  to  appear,  that  even  had  this  system 
been  thus  instituted  by  the  apostles,  it  would  still  be  necessary, 
in  order  to  brand  any  deviation  from  it  —  not  in  a  spirit  of  self- 
willed  resistance,  but  of  a  godly  desire  to  carry  out  the  teaching 
of  our  Lord,  —  with  a  measure  of  guilt  so  foul,  as  to  be  atoned 
for  only,  by  exclusion  from  the  favor  of  God,  and  from  the 
enjoyment  of  his  grace; — to  prove  that  the  system  was  made 
essential,  and  held  forth  as  among  the  articles  of  faith.  But  for 
this,  no  such  proof  can  be  advanced  from  the  word  of  God. 

Weighed  in  the  balances  of  truth,  this  prelatic  doctrine  of 
apostolic  succession  is  therefore  found  \vanting.  It  is  clearly 
adulterate,  and  is  not  the  pure  fine  gold  of  the  sanctuary.  It 
may  be  jure  ecclesiasio,  but  it  cannot  be  jure  divino.  It  may 
be   de   canonico,  but  it  cannot  be  de  fide.     It   may  be  de  jure 

1)  See  in  Lect.  ii.  iii.  and  iv. 


LECT.  VIII.]         THIS    SUCCESSION   A  FACT   TO   BE   PROVED.  183 

regum,  but  it  cannot  be  pretended  to  be  de  jure  regis  regum. 
It  may  be  delivered  ex  cathedra,  but  it  cannot  be  proclaimed 
"  as  by  commandment  of  the  Lord."  To  impose  it  as  a  heavy 
burden  upon  the  consciences  of  all  men,  is  wantonly  to  usurp 
the  throne  of  judgment  —  for  all  judgment  is  committed  unto  the 
Son.  —  It  is  to  affront  the  supremacy  of  Him,  who  has  not  vacated 
his  throne,  but  ever  lives  as  head  over  all  things  to  his  church. 
As  a  question  of  conscience,  the  matter  is  thus  clearly  decided. 
No  possible  doubts  or  fears  can  have  place  respecting  it.  We 
may  sit  unmoved  and  unharmed,  whatever  fiery  assaults  may  be 
made  upon  us,  and  their  comminations,  anathemas,  and  badly 
mimicked  fears,  we  may  treat  as  the  idle  wind,  which  we  regard 
not ;  "  for  where  there  is  no  law,  there  is  no  transgression." 

But  satisfactory  as  is  the  conclusion  to  which  we  are  thus  led, 
it  may  be  well,  for  our  full  confirmation,  to  bring  this  doctrine  to 
the  tests  of  some  other  principles ;  and  first  let  us  try  it  by  the 
standard  of  history. 

To  this  investigation  we  are  indeed  challenged  in  a  voice  not 
less  bold  and  confident  of  victory,  than  that  of  the  giant  Philis- 
tine, when  he  scowled  defiance  upon  the  army  of  the  Israelites. 
Peradventure,  if  God  shall  give  his  assistance,  this  boasting 
may  be  found  as  vain  and  profitless,  even  though  a  David  may 
be  wanting  to  fio-ht  the  battles  of  the  Lord.  The  cause  is  safe, 
whatever  may  be  the  portion  of  its  advocates,  since  victory  is  al- 
ready sure. — "  These,"  we  are  told,  are  "mainly  matters  of  fact, 
resting  upon  history,  and  not  on  preconceived  opinions,  and  con- 
troversalists  must  be  reminded  that  they  are  to  be  dealt  with  as 
facts,  and  can  be  met  only  by  historical  contradictions.'"  So 
says  Bishop  Seabury :  "  there  is  no  other  way  left  to  obtain  a 
valid  commission  to  act  as  Christ's  ministers  in  his  church,  but 
by  an  uninterrupted  succession  of  ordinations  from  the  apostles. 
Where  this  is  wanting,  all  spiritual  power  in  Christ's  church  is 
wanting  also."^ 

The  fact,  then,  to  be  proved,  is,  as  the  same  writer  states  it, 
the  derivation  of  their  power  from  the  apostles,  through  epis- 
copal (prelatical)  ordination,  —  in  other  words,  the  apostolical 
succession.  "  This  succession  has  been  handed  down,"  it  is  said, 
"  with  scrupulous  care  from  the  earliest  times,  and  at  the  refor- 
mation, was  rigidly  preserved  in  the  Church  of  England."^     In 

1)  Oxford  Theology  in  the  Loud.  "We  must  be  as  sure,"  they  say, 
Quarterly  Review,  April,  1840,  p.  294.  "  that  the  bishop  is  Christ's  appointed 
This  is  an  elaborate  defence  of  the  representative  as  if  we  actually  saw 
Oxford  Theology,  perhaps  by  Southey.  him  work  miracles  as  St,  Peter  and  St 

2)  Sermons,  vol.  i.  p.   12.     Brit.  Paul  did."     Oxf.  Tr.  No.  10,  p.  4. 
Crit.  Oct.  1839,  p.  309.  3)  Brit.  Crit.  Oct.  1839,  p.  309. 


184  THE   EVIDENCE   REQUIRED    FOR   THIS   FACT.        [lECT.  VIII. 

Other  words,  the  whole  power  of  the  ministry  is  derived  from 
the  apostles  through  a  line  of  prelates  personally  succeeding 
them,  every  link  of  which  is  unbroken  and  perfect,  and  which 
line  can  be  still  made  clear  by  every  prelate. 

It  must  then,  as  we  have  already  shown,  be  made  manifest 
that  not  a  single  link  is  wanting  in  this  entire  chain.'  It  must 
be  proved  that  each  individual  in  this  succession  had  received 
an  ordination,  which  in  its  form  was  perfectly  valid  and  beyond 
doubt.^  It  must  be  further  proved  of  each  individual,  that  as  a 
subject  for  that  ordination,  he  was  in  all  respects  duly  qualified, 
both  as  required  by  scripture  and  the  canons.^  And  further 
still,  it  must  be  proved  in  regard  to  each  individual,  singly  and 
separately  considered,  not  only  that  he  was  a  fit  subject  for  or- 
dination —  not  only  that  he  was  ordained  in  due  and  regular 
form  —  but  also  that  all  this  was  true  of  each  of  his  ordaihers. 
They  also,  it  must  be  shown,  were  in  number,  in  character,  in 
standing,  and  in  qualifications,  such  as  to  give  validity  to  their 
act,  and  thus  efficaciously  to  communicate  the  plenitudo  sacer- 
dotii ;   the  plenitude  of  sacerdotal  grace. 

A  failure  of  '^ proof  for  the  historic  fact,'"  in  any  one  par- 
ticular, regarding  any  one  individual,  in  this  apostolical  succes- 
sion, throws  doubt  upon  the  whole  ;  and  the  certainty  of  an 
unbroken  line  being  thus  destroyed,  the  whole  pompous  fabric 
crumbles  into  dust.  When  a  perpetual  succession  of  prelates  who 
have  been  found  duly  authenticated  in  each  of  these  particulars, 
and  wanting  in  none,  is  established,  then,  and  not  till  then,  may 
our  faith  be  challenged.*  Till  then,  we  will  continue  to  rejoice 
that  the  reformers  wrenched  this  chain  from  the  hands  of  apos- 
tate Rome,  and  fastened  it  afresh  to  the  rock  of  scriptural  trutli.* 

Let  us  first  inquire,  therefore,  whether  these  conditions  can  be 
met  in  any  fairness,  as  it  regards  the  period  immediately  subse- 
quent to  the  establishment  of  Christianity.  Supposing  the  foun- 
dation to  have  been  as  securely  laid,  as  we  have  found  it  utter- 
ly insecure,  the  next  most  important  step  would  be  to  approve 
as  sound  and  good  the  first  links,  by  which  the  whole  succession 
is  attached  to  tiiis  adamantine  rock. — Thus  only  can  it  be 
demonstrably  transmitted,  in  uninterrupted  succession,  to  the 
present  time. 

Now  here  we  boldly  deny,  that  there  does  exist  any  such 
historical  evidence  in  the  first  age  of  the  church,  as  to  stamp 
any  traditive  doctrine  on  this  point,  with  a  clear  and  full  apos- 

1)  See  Brit.   Crit.  Oct.  1839,  p.              4)  See  Chillingworth,  vol.i.  p.tOG. 
309.  '                         5)  See  Voetius  Desperata  Causa 

2)  See  ibid.  Papatus,    Amsterdam,   1535,   p.   268, 

3)  See  Lect.  V.  Lib.  11,  Lect.  11.  Cap.  xix. 


LECT.  VIII.]  PETER    NEVER    AT   ROME.  185 

tolical  character.  There  is  no  such  thing  as  an  universal  agree- 
ment either  as  to  the  facts,  or  as  to  the  doctrine  founded  upon 
thein,  and  therefore  no  title  of  undoubted  authority. 

As  the  Anghcan  church  traces  up  her  succession  through  the 
Romish  church,  so  that  its  vaHdity  depends  upon  the  validity 
of  that  church,'  what  is  the  proof,  we  ask,  for  tlie  succession,  as 
commencing  with  Peter,  and  descending  to  the  present  occupant 
of  the  Roman  papal  throne  ?  This  chain,  on  which  is  suspended 
the  whole  character  and  hopes  of  the  British  hierarchy,  is,  we 
aver,  defective  at  the  very  point  where  the  firmest  coherence  is 
needed.  "  It  is  indistinct  and  attenuated,  and  open  to  valid 
objections,  at  its  commencement,  where  it  should  have  been  clear 
and  uncontroverted." 

The  very  basis  on  which  the  whole  succession  is  founded,  is 
still  open  to  serious  disputation,  as  untenable  and  groundless. 
For  that  Peter  ever  was  at  Rome  at  all,  is  a  question  on  which 
learned  men  have  given  very  different  vievvs.^ 

On  what  authority  is  it  asserted,  that  Peter  ever  was  at  Rome 
at  all  ?  Besides  one  or  two  other  fabulous  legends  about  the 
aeronautic  flight  of  Simon  Magus,  and  the  personal  encounter 
with  our  Saviour,  when  the  apostle  was  again  denying  Christ 
by  a  base  and  unmanly  flight  —  it  is  alleged  that  the  sepulchre 
of  St.  Peter  is  to  be  seen  at  Rome  at  this  day.  But  even  were 
the  real  body  of  the  apostle  enshrined  at  Rome,  we  know  that 
the  translation  of  the  bones  and  bodies  of  martyrs  from  one  place 
to  another,  is  no  unusual  thing  in  the  history  of  Rome.  But  again, 
how  are  we  to  believe  that  the  body  ol  St.  Peter  is  actually 
at  Rome,  when,  as  Dr.  Fulke  says,^  "half  his  body  is  at  Peter's 
in  Rome,  the  other  half  at  Paul's  ;  and  yet  he  hath  another  head 
at  John  Lateran  ;  and  his  nether  jaw,  with  the  beard  upon  it, 
is  in  France,  at  Poictiers ;  at  Triers,  many  of  his  bones ;  at 
Geneva  was  part  of  his  brain,  which  was  found  to  be  a  pumice 
stone  :  like  as  Anthony's  arm  was  found  to  be  a  hart's  pissel." 

1)  "  From  the  church  of  Rome,"  stands  or  falls,  with  the  opinion  that 

says  Dr.  Geo.  Miller  in  his  recent  Let-  the  church  of  Rome  "never  erred  in 

ter  to  Dr.  Pusey,  (Lond.  1840,  p  6,)  fundamentals."     See  Neal's  Puritans, 

"  corrupted  though  it  was,  we  profess  vol.  iii.  p.  189.     See  p.  193. 

to  have  received  the  sacred  orders  of  "  I  agree  with  the  Romanists  inres- 

our  priesthood,  and  the  commissioned  olutely  maintaming  the  doctrine  of  the 

authority  of  our  episcopacy;  and  we  apostolical  succession."     Pratt's    Old 

are  accordingly  ever  ready  to  acknowl-  Paths,  p.  221 . 

edge,    as    already    invested   with  the  2)   Spiritual  Despotism,  p.  303. 

holy  orders  of  our  church,  and  there-  3)  See  this  question  discussed  in 

fore  requiring  no  new  ordination  for  Bowers'    Hist,   of  the    Popes,    vol.  i. 

admission  among  our  clergy,  those  of  ch.  i. 

the  clergy  of  that  church,  who  have,  4)  Conf.  of  Rhem.  Test,  on  Rom. 

from  time  to  time,  connected  tliem-  IG,  p.   185,  Am.  ed.   and   Dr.   Willet, 

selves  with  ours."  Syn.  Pap.  p.  LGO. 
Laud  confesses  that  this  succession 

24 


186 


PETER    NEVER    AT    ROME. 


[LECT.  VIII. 


Tliere  is  no  agreement  as  to  the  time,  when  tlie  apostle  should 
have  visited  Rome/  The  time  specified  is  absolutely  contra- 
dictory to  scripture  history .'^  There  are  several  considerations 
grounded  upon  scripture  statements,  which  involve  this  assump- 
tion in  impenetrable  obscurity,  and  make  it  more  dlfllcult  to 
believe  than  to  reject  the  story,  as  "  but  a  fable. "^  It  is  also  not 
improbable,  that  Peter  died  at  Antioch,  and  not  at  Rome." 

The  arguments  against  the  supposition  by  many  learned  men, 
have  never  been  satisfactorily  answered,*  while  they  have  been 
considered  irrefragable  even  by  Romanists  themselves. « 

Thus  much  may  suffice,  as  to  the  uncertainty  which  surrounds 
the  question,  whether  Peter  ever  was  at  Rome  at  all.  But  that 
Peter  was  the  fixed  and  resident  bishop  of  Rome,  is  a  most 
untenable  position,  and  contrary  to  all  reason.' 


1)  Orosius,  Jerome,  and  Damasus 
differ.     See  Willel,  Syn.  Pap.  161. 

2)  Ibid. 

3)  See  Bradford,  Let.  to  Lady 
Vane,  in  Brit.  Ref.  vol.  ii.  p.  101,  and 
in  Fathers  of  the  Engl.  Ch.  vol.  vi.  p. 
139.  Tiiis  martyr-bishop  there  prom- 
ises more  fully  to  establish  this  point 
in  a  Treatise  on  Antichrist.  See  also 
Fulke,  as  above,  and  Dr.  WiUet,  Syn. 
Pap.  p.  161, 102.  Dr.  Barrow  in  Wks. 
fol.  vol.  i.  p.  599. 

4)  See  Auth.  inWillet,Syn.Pap. 
p.  162. 

5)  See  Illyricus,  lib.  contr.  primat. 
pap.  Uldariciis  Velenus  ;  Calvin,  Inst, 
lib.  4,  c.  6,  §  16 ;  Ma^deb  Cent.  Cent. 
l,lib.  2,  c.  10,  col.  561,  in  Dr.  Willet. 
Cranmer  denies  that  Peter  vi^as  at 
Rome.  See  in  Burnet's  Hist,  of  Re- 
form, vol.  iv.  pref  B.  2,  A.  D.  1534. 
See  others  in  PowtU  on  Ap.  Succ.  p. 
107;  Zancliius  de  Eccl.  cap.  9; 
Bp.  Bull's  Vind.  of  the  Ch.  of  Engl. 
p.  73,  75,  78;  Oxf  edit.  Owen's  Wks. 
vol.  xix.  p.  202.  "  As  to  what  is  re- 
corded in  story ;  the  order  and  series 
of  things,  with  the  discovery  afford- 
ed us  of  Peter's  course  and  place  of 
abode  in  scripture  do  prevail  with  me 
to  think  steadfastly  he  was  never 
there." 

See  also  Frid.  Spanheim,  filio  in 
quat.  dissert.  T.  2,  Opp.  p.  333,  seq  ; 
Spanheim,  Hist.  Christ.  §  1,  p.  569 ; 
Ayton's  Orig  Const,  of  the  Ch.  p. 
483,  where  Scaliger  in  Euseb.  p.  189, 
and  Wales,  in  Euseb.  p.  2,  10.  See 
also  Spanheim,  Miscell.  Sac.  Antiq. 
1.  3,  dissert.  3;  Bishop  Reynolds 
against  Hart,  cap.  ii,  in  Div.  Right  of 
M'ai.  Ft.  2,  p.  115;  Dr.  Whittaker, 
lib,  de   Pontif.  qn.  2,  cap.  15,  in  ibid, 


p.  117;  Junius,  Contro.  lib.  2,  cap.  5, 
not.  18;  and  ibid,  p.  124. 

On  the  whole  subject,  see  a  full  and 
learned  reference  to  various  authori- 
ties in  Fabricii  Lux  Evang.  under  the 
head  of  **  tradiliones  minus  certEe." 
p.  95  -  98. 

6)  Lyranus,  in  Dr.  Willet. 

7)  See  this  matter  discussed  who 
full  authorities,  in  Dr.  Willet,  Syn- 
Pap.  p.  163,  164,  and  again  at  p  168. 
See  also  fully  argued  by  Dr.  Barrow 
on  the  Pope's  supremacy,  in  Wks.  fol. 
vol  i.  p.  599-602;  Spanheim's  Eccl. 
Hist.  Wright's  Transl.  p.  146,  n.  3. 
See  also  Bishop  While's  Lectures  on 
the  Catechism,  Dissert,  i.  §  2,  p.  411  - 
4 J 7,  Philad.  18J3;  Dr.  Rice  in  Lit. 
and  Evang.  Mag.  vol.  ix.  pp.  72,  73; 
Campbell's  Lect.  on  Eccl.  Plist.  Lect. 
xii.  p.  215;  Bayne's  Diocesan's  Try- 
all,  Lond.  1621,  p.  31. 

See  also  Tracts,  by  the  ever- 
memorable  John  Hales,  Lond.  1721, 
p.  206 ;  "  Yea,  says  he,  that  he  was 
bishop  at  all,  (as  now  the  name  of 
bishop  is  taken,)  may  be  very  ques- 
tionable ;  for  the  ancients,  that  reckon 
up  the  bishops  of  Rome  until  their 
times,  as  Eusebius,  and  before  him 
Tertullian,  and  before  them  both  Ire- 
naeus,  never  account  Peter  as  bishop 
of  that  see  ;  and  Epiphanius  tells  us 
that  Peter  and  Paul  were  both  bishops 
of  Rome  at  once  ;  by  which  it  is  plain, 
he  took  the  title  of  bishop  in  another 
sense  than  now  it  is  used  ;  for  now, 
and  so  for  a  long  time  upward,  two 
bishops  can  no  more  possess  one  see, 
than  two  hedge-sparrows  dwell  in  one 
bush.  St.  Peter's  time  was  a  little  too 
early  for  bishops  to  rise." 


LECT.  VIII.]  PETER    NEVER    BISHOP    OF    ROME.  187 

That  Peter  occupied  that  chair  as  the  head  of  the  papal  succes- 
sion —  as  the  exclusive  source  of  transmitted  grace  to  the  church  ; 
is  a  gross  and  palpable  fabrication,  destitute  of  all  scriptural  basis, 
or  historic  verity,  and  the  pregnant  source  of  innumerable  crimes, 
and  the  blackest  enormities  that  have  stained  the  bloody  page  of 
ecclesiastical  history. 

"  All  unavoided  is  this  doom  of  destiny."  The  very  core  of 
the  papacy  is  rottenness.  The  comer-stone  is  wanting,  and  its 
airy  castle  topples  to  the  ground.  There  is  uncertainty,  to  say 
the  least,  around  the  very  charter  from  which  this  whole  succes- 
sion dates  its  lineage.  God  in  his  merciful  providence  has  thus 
baffled  the  devices  of  Satan,  and  wrested  from  him  this  prime 
principle  of  intolerance  and  heresy  —  the  very  pillar  and  ground 
of  the  unity  and  infallibility  of  Rome. 

But  let  this  pass,  and  supposing  Peter  to  have  been  bishop 
of  Rome.  Whom,  we  inquire,  did  this  imaginary  pope  —  or 
these  popes  ? — choose  and  ordain  to  be  his  successor  ?  No  one 
could  have  dared  to  assume  the  apostolate  of  Peter  and  the  pri- 
macy of  Rome,  the  destined  mistress  of  the  world,  unless  called 
as  was  Aaron  —  unless  called,  chosen,  and  invested  with  the 
keys  of  earth,  hell,  and  heaven,  by  the  divine  apostle.  Who 
was  thus  chosen,  called,  and  ordained  ?  We  ask  and  demand  an 
answer — Who  ? 

"These  great  apostles,"  answers  Dr.  Hook,  "successively 
ordained  Linus,  Cletus,  and  Clement,  bishops  of  Rome,"  from 
whom  "  the  prelates  in  these  realms  derive  their  mission  by 
an  unbroken,  spiritual  descent."^  And  "  this  continued  descent 
is  evident  to  every  one  who  chooses  to  investigate  it."  Most 
boldly  spoken.  And  now,  surely,  we  will  have  the  proof;  "  for 
these  are  matters  of  fact  resting  on  history,  and  not  on  precon- 
ceived opinions,  and  controversialists  must  be  reminded  "2  of  this. 
Unlock,  then,  your  doors,  ye  guardian  prelates  ;  summon  to  your 
aid  the  whole  orders  of  "  bishops,  priests,  and  deacons,  who 
can,  if  they  please,  trace  their  spiritual  descent  from  St.  Peter 
or  St.  Paul."*  Let  it  please  you  to  bring  forth  the  priceless 
Sybil  leaves,  on  which  are  charactered,  in  burning  proof,  strong 
as  of  Holy  Writ,  the  insignia  of  this  early  royalty.  Oh,  why  so 
tantalizing  to  a  world  ready  to  pay  all  due  homage  to  your  just 
honors  ?  or  so  modest,  as  to  conceal  from  view  the  evidences  of 
your  unpretending  greatness  ? 

To  be  most  serious,  (where  gravity  itself  might  be  overcome, 
to  see  this  mountainous   fabric  in  laborious  agony)  here,  again, 

1)  Dr.   Hook's  Two  Sermons,  3d  2)  Edinb.  Rev.  Oxf.  Theol.  Ap. 

ed.  Lend.  Ib37,  pp.  7,  8.  1839,  p.  294. 

3)  Dr.  Hook,  as  above. 


188  PETER   HAD    NO    SUCCESSOR.  [LECT.    VIII. 

confusion  becomes  worse  confounded.  There  is  no  proof  what- 
ever, either  in  the  New  Testament,  or  in  any  authentic  docu- 
ment of  the  apostolic  remains;  or  in  any  veritable  authors ;  that 
the  apostles  called  and  invested  any  single  individual  named  or 
nameless,  with  the  prelacy  of  Rome. 

Irenffius  is  the  first  writer  they  produce.  He  testifies  that  Li- 
nus was  the  first  occupant  of  the  see  of  Rome,  though  how  he 
came  there,  or  when,  or  by  whom  ;  or  whether  validly  ordained, 
or  himself  a  valid  subject  for  ordination,  he  does  not  tell.'  He 
does  not  even  say  which  of  the  apostles  delivered  the  episco- 
pate to  Linus  ;  nor  that  he  was  ever  ordained  by  the  imposition 
of  hands  at  all,  and  thus  received  the  communication  of  the 
plenitude  of  episcopal  grace.  And,  more  than  this,  what  Irense- 
us  does  say,  he  does  not  pretend  to  authenticate  by  testimony, 
but  gives  it  as  "  that  which  is  held  as  a  tradition  from  the  apos- 
tles,"—  if,  indeed,  as  Grabe  argues,  this  does  not  refer  exclu- 
sively to  the  fidem,  or  faith,  of  which  he  speaks,  and  not  to  the 
successiones  or  succession.^  To  Linus,  Irenaeus  says,  succeeded 
Anaclelus,'  to  him  Clemsens,  and  to  him  Evaristus,  and  Al- 
exander. Now  Irena3us  wrote  the  treatise  from  which  this  testi- 
mony is  derived,  about  the  year  A.  D.  176,  or  192.* 

The  next  witness  is  Eusebius,  who  was  consecrated  bishop 
about  the  year  A.  D.  320.^  He  says  that  "  after  the  martyr- 
dom of  Paul  and  Peter,  Linus  was  the  first  that  received  the 
episcopate  at  Rome  ;"®  and  that  after  holding  it  twelve  years, 
he  "transferred  it  to  Anacletus,'"  who  was  "succeeded  by 
Clemens."*  Now  let  us  be  permitted  to  cross-examine  this  wit- 
ness. We  would  then  inquire  what  Eusebius  knows  about  this  mat- 
ter, from  actual  documentary  or  other  sufficient  data,  especially  as 
it  is  pretended  by  some  that  he  had  by  him  such  existent  records  ?^ 
Eusebius  answers  in  this  same  work,  (chapter  iv.)  "  but  how 
many,  and  which  of  these,  actuated  by  a  genuine  zeal,  were 
judged  suitable  to  feed  the  churches,  established  by  these  apos- 
tles, IT  IS  NOT  EASY  to  shovv,  further  than  may  be  gathered 
from  the  writings  of  Paul."  On  what,  then,  we  would  ask,  did 
this  writer  rely,  as  the  source  of  his  information  ?  He  frankly 
declares,  "  that  he  was  obliged  to  rely  much  on  tradition,  and 
that  he  could  trace  no  footsteps  of  other  historians  going  before 
him  only  in  a  few  narratives."     Let  us  further  inquire,  then,  if 

1)  Adv.  Haer,iii.  3.  7)  Lib.  iii.  §  13. 

2)  Jrenffius,  cap.  iii.  §  2,  p.  175;  8)  Ibid,  §  14. 

Grabe  in  Dissert,  iii.  §  4.  9)   See    Eccl.   Hist.   Leipsic  edi- 

3)  Ibid,  §  iii.  p.  174.  tion,  vol.  i.  p.  187,  Notes. 

4)  Lardner,  vol.  ii.  p.  166.  10)  See  his  introductory  chapter, 

5)  Ibid,  vol.iv.  p.  72.  and  Dr.  Miller  on  the  Min.  p.  129. 

6)  Eccl.  Hist.  iii.  §  2. 


LECT.  VIII.]  PETER    HAD    NO    SUCCESSOR.  189 

Eusebius  knows  whether  any  individual  apostle  did  really  de- 
signate Linus  to  the  episcopate  at  Rome  ?  Eusebius  gives  no 
answer  to  that  question.  Let  us  again  ask,  whether  Linus  was 
actually  ordained  by  imposition  of  hands  ?  Eusebius  does  not 
say.  Was  it  during  the  life  of  tiie  apostles  Paul  and  Peter, 
that  this  Linus  received  the  episcopate  ?  "  No"  says  Eusebi- 
us, "  it  was  after  their  martyrdom.'"  But  pray,  inform  us, 
what  was  the  nature  of  that  episcopate  which  Linus  thus  receiv- 
ed after  the  death  of  the  apostles  ?  This,  Eusebius  does  not 
determine,  so  that  whether  he  was  a  presbyter-bishop,  or  a  dio- 
cesan-bishop ;  whether  a  governor  of  presbyters,  or  himself  a 
presbyter,  or  presiding  moderator,  president,  or  senior  among 
other  presbyters  ;  whether  he  was  a  bishop  of  the  church  at 
Rome,  or  of  the  whole  region  around  Rome  ;  whether  he  had 
under  him  the  orders  of  presbyters  and  deacons,  who  were  ex- 
cluded from  all  right  to  ordain  ;  and  whether  his  office  was  con- 
sidered as  of  divine  right,  in  its  superiority  ;  all  this,  which  is  of 
the  very  essence  of  the  prelatic  doctrine  of  apostolical  succes- 
sion, is  left  entirely  undetermined  —  nay,  rather  determined 
against  its  claims,  since  we  are  referred,  by  Eusebius,  to  the 
Acts  of  the  Apostles,  and  to  the  Epistles,  where,  as  we  have 
already  seen,  prelacy  is  not  to  be  found. 

Linus,  then,  not  receiving  his  office  till  after  the  death  of  the 
apostles,  could  not  receive  it  from  them  :  and  could  not,  of 
course,  transmit,  in  succession,  any  gifts,  graces,  or  powers, 
which  he  never  received.  He  was  never  invested  with  this  of- 
fice by  the  apostles,  for  he  received  it  after  their  death,  and,  of 
course,  whatever  virtue  there  is  in  Romish  succession,  must 
originate  with,  and  terminate  in  Linus,  and  not  in  the  apostles. 
Neither  do  Irenaeus  nor  Eusebius  give  any  proof,  but  only  a 
tradition,  in  the  one  case  a  hundred  years  old,  and  in  the  other, 
more  than  two  hundred,  and  in  both  cases  delivered  after  the 
hierarchy  had  entered  on  its  progress,  and  the  prelatic  spirit  had 
wormed  itself  into  the  bosom  of  the  church,  and  corroded  that 
vital  energy  which  lay  in  its  purity  and  simplicity.  We  know 
not,  and  it  is  impossible  that  we  now  should  know,  who  was  the 
first  stationed  minister  or  pastor  at  Rome.  We  know  not  who 
succeeded  him,  nor  how  this  successor  was  appointed,  nor  when, 
nor  how  ordained  ;  and  that  he  was  a  diocesan  prelate  of  the  first 
order,  having  under  him  two  other  orders,  essentially  distinct ; 
and  that  he  was  the  first  link  in  the  electric  chain  of  celes- 
tial grace  —  these  are  figments  which  break  in  the  rough  and 
uncivil  hands  of  stubborn  historical  verity,  like  a  rope  of  sand. 

1)  fj.iTct  TJtv  Holuxh  K.CU  IXsTg"  fAu^'Tugiu.v ,  ch.  11,  §  1,  vol.  i.  p.  187. 


190 


Peter's  successors  not  to  be  found.        [lect.  viii. 


A  poor  foundation  this,  whereon   to  build  the  destiny  of  mil- 
lions !' 

But,  perhaps,  what  is  wanting  in  the  testimony  of  these  two 
early  traditionists,  (and  to  whom,  although  they  do  not  verify 
this  baseless  theory,  we  yet  owe  much,)  may  be  made  up  by  the 
clear,  full,  universal,  and  unvarying  testimony  of  other  writers. 
Nothing  of  the  kind  is,  however,  true.  The  case  of  this  totter- 
ing erection  is  made  infinitely  worse,  by  the  very  attempt  to  re- 
new or  strengthen  its  frail  foundations.  Irenaeus  and  Eusebius, 
we  have  seen,  place  Anacletus  next  to  Linus,  as  having  receiv- 
ed the  episcopate  from  him.  Now  Tertullian,  and  several 
others  assure  us,  that  this  is  an  entire  mistake,  for  that  Clem- 
ens was  first  of  all,  and  the  next  lineal  descendent  of  Peter, 
or  whosoever  it  might  be.  Epiphanius  and  Optatus  again  seri- 
ously affirm,  that  Anacletus  and  Cletus  were  before  Clemens. 
Jerome,  Augustine,  Damasus,  and  others,  difier  from  them 
all,  and  assert  that  Anacletus,  Cletus,  and  Linus,  were  all  ante- 
rior to  Clemens,  and  the  first  links  in  this  chain  of  living  ener- 
gy. Damasus  is  of  opinion  that  Peter  ordained  two  succes- 
sors, and  not  one  merely.  Vossius  declares,  that  before  the 
time  of  Evaristus,  two  or  three  successors  sat  together  on  this 
episcopal  throne. "^ 


1)  Thus  it  is  shown,  that  the 
whole  of  tliis  stupendous  pantheon 
rests  upon  tlie  two  pillars  of  Irenaeus 
and  Eusebius.  But  Irenteus,  besides 
tJiat  he  gives  no  positive  testimony  as 
to  what  is  of  importance  in  tlie  case, 
does  actually,  in  other  parts  of  his 
writings,  show  that  by  bishops  he 
meant  presbyters,  and  that  he  had  no 
conception  whatever  of  modern  bish- 
ops or  prelates,  (as  in  Lib.  4  cap.  43, 
and  Lib.  .5,  cap.  2.3;  and  see  Div. 
Right  of  the  Min.  Pt.  2,  p.  115-117.) 
If  Irenaeus,  therefore,  proves  any  thing 
in  the  case,  it  is  that  presbyters  are 
the  only  true  successors  of  the  apos- 
tles. 

As  to  Eusebius,  being  more  in  the 
dark,  and  less  liable  to  detection,  he  is 
rather  more  bold.  But  as  Scaliger, 
with  the  approbation  of  Bishop  Rey- 
nolds, affirms,  Eusebius  read  ancient 
history  parum  atlente  as  tliey  sliow  by 
many  proofs.  All  he  declares  is  only 
on  the  authority,  that  sic  scrihitur,  so 
it  is  reported,  and  his  only  references 
are  to  unexisting  records.  (See  Div. 
Right  of  Min.  p.  04.) 

On  the  doubtful  credit  to  be  attach- 
ed to  Eusebius  in  this  matter,  see 
also   Henderson's  Review   and  Con- 


sid.  Edinb.  4to.  1706,  p.  331,  371- 
373,  where  he  quotes  Scaliger,  Dido- 
clave,  Stillingfleet,  «&c. ;  Mosheira's 
Commentaries,  vol.  i.  pp.  135,  297, 
2'J4;  Stillingfleet,  Irenicum,  p.  341; 
Plea  for  Presbytery,  Glasg.  1840, 
p.  248. 

We  may  here  apply  the  rule  laid 
down  by  Bishop  Lloyd.  "  But  for  the 
number  of  witnesses,  I  think  that  is 
not  much  to  be  considered  when  they 
come,  (as  these  do,)  all  in  file,  one  af- 
ter another,  so  that  all  their  strength 
is  resolved  into  the  credit  of  one 
author."  Hist.  Acct.  of  Ch.  Gov.  in 
Great  Brit,  and  Irel.  Lond.  1684, 
Pref 

Again,  he  makes  it  a  chief  argu- 
ment against  the  Scottish  claims  "  by 
showing  the  distance  of  time  at  which 
the  first  author  of  them  lived,  from  the 
persons  and  things  of  which  he  writ." 
Ibid.  "It  is  a  shrewd  presumption 
against  the  truth  of  any  matter  de- 
livered in  history,  when  it  is  said  to 
have  been  many  ages  before  the  time 
of  him  that  was  the  first  author  that 
mentioned  it."     Ibid. 

2)  See  Dr.  Miller  on  the  Ministry, 
p.  327. 


LECT.  VIII.]        Peter's  successors  not  to  be  found,  191 

Irenapus  and  Eusebius  then  declare,  that  they  knew  no  more 
about  this  whole  matter  than  we  ourselves  are  still  able  to 
discover,  from  the  apostolic  records ;  while  that  which  they  did 
know,  most  effectually  cuts  up  by  the  roots,  this  goodly  tree  of 
prelatical  succession.  And  all  the  fathers  and  writers  alter  them 
affirm,  and  deny,  and  contradict,  and  make  doubly  uncertain, 
this  first  stage  in  the  progress  of  a  succession,  which  is,  never- 
theless, as  these  modern  divines  teach,  "  evident  to  every  one 
who  chooses  to  investigate  it ;  and  an  unbroken  line  from  Peter 
to  the  present  day,  which  every  bishop,  priest,  and  deacon,  can 
trace  !" 

This  may  be  true,  however  doctors  may  differ ;  for  we  are 
required,  on  this  system,  to  believe  what  is  plainly  contrary  to 
fact  and  evidence,  with  an  implicit  faith. i  But  sure  we  are, 
that  every  ecclesiastical  writer,  of  any  name  or  honesty,  will 
assert  the  fact,  that  the  order  of  this  primitive  succession  cannot 
be  determined."  The  facts  in  the  case  are  irrecoverably  lost, 
and  are  buried,  by  a  gracious  Providence,  at  the  very  bottom 
of  that  fathomless  gulf  of  oblivion,  into  which  the  memory  of 
man  pierceth  not. 

Nay,  this  order  of  primogeniture  is  a  subject  of  controversy 
even  within  the  bosom  of  the  Romish  church  itself  Tertul- 
lian,  we  have  seen,  makes  Clement  the  immediate  successor  of 
the  apostle  Peter.^  In  this  he  was  followed  by  Ruffinus,  and 
by  the  Latins  generally,  among  whom,  in  the  fourth  century,  this 
opinion  universally  prevailed.  But  Jerome  rejected  this  opin- 
ion, and  placed  Linus  first,  who  was,  of  course,  ordained  by  St. 
Peter.  Tertullian,  however,  assures  us  that  Clement  was 
thus  ordained  ;  while  the  apostolical  constitutions,  which  place 
Linus  first,  tell  us,  in  the  most  express  terms,  that  he  was  or- 
dained, not  by  St.  Peter,  but  by  St.  Paul."*  Now,  however,  it  is 
believed,  as  a  matter  of  faith,  in  spite  of  all  contradictory  evi- 
dence, both  from  the  Greek  and  Latin  church,  that  Linus  was 
the  first  bishop  of  Rome.^ 

In  the  English  church,  the  same  controversy  has  prevailed. 
Dr.  Hammond  will  have  it  that  Clement,  Linus,  and  Anacletus 
all  succeeded  Peter,  and  held  co-ordinate  jurisdiction  ;  the  first 
over  the  Jews,  and  the  others  over  the  Gentiles.*  This  theory 
Cotelerius  rejects  as  without  any  support,  while  Dr.  Pearson 

1)  See  Dodsworthon  Dissent,  and  3)  De  Prcescript.  heret.  c.  32. 
Ilef.  in  Lect.  4,  p.  83.                                          4)  See  B.  vii.  ch.  46. 

2)  See  Hind's  Rise  and  Progress  5)  See  Bower's   Hist,   of  Popes, 
of  Christ,  vol.  ii.  p.   165,  who  thinks  vol.  i.  p.  9. 

there  were  two  churches  at  Rome  ;  6)  Hammond  I.  5,  c.  1. 

Gieseler's  Eccl.    Hist.  vol.  1,  p.  66 ; 
Stillingfleet,  Iren. 


192  Peter's  successors  not  to  be  found.       [lect.  viii 

insists  that  it  is,  as  Cyprian  says,  contrary  to  the  evangelic 
law,  and  to  the  rules  of  the  catholic  institution,  for  two  bishops 
to  preside  together  in  one  city.'  This,  also,  was  determined  on 
in  the  council  of  Nice,^  and  became  a  settled  proverb,  "  one 
God,  one  Christ,  one  bishop," — two  prelates  being  regarded,  as 
Tlieodoret  testifies,  infamous.3  So  that  "  whoever  is  made  bish- 
op after  the  first,  is,  says  Cyprian,  not  a  second  bishop,  but  no 
bishop."''  Archbishop  Potter  again  asserts,  that  "Clemens  not 
only  conversed  with  the  apostles,  but  was  ordained  bishop  of 
Rome  by  St.  Peter."*  Bishop  Pearson  proves  that  Linus  died 
before  Peter,  and  how  could  he  succeed  him  ? 

Thus  is  it  made  apparent,  in  what  palpable  and  gross  dark- 
ness, in  what  impenetrable  obscurity,  the  prime  question,  on 
which  this  whole  cause  rests  —  the  corner-stone  and  foundation 
on  which  the  stately  structure  of  the  prelacy,  Romish  and  Angli- 
can is  built  —  is  involved.  Irenaeus  positively  declares  that  the 
church,  at  Rome,  was  only  founded  by  the  apostles  Peter  and 
Paul,  who  left  Linus  in  charge,  while  they  pursued  their  course. 
Of  necessity,  there  was  no  succession  in  the  case  whatever,  and 
their  authority,  the  apostles  still  held  in  possession.  Eusebius, 
and  Epiphanius  both  affirm  that  Peter  and  Paul  were,  at  the  same 
time,  both  bishops  and  apostles.**  Both,  therefore,  were  bish- 
ops, or  neither,  and  if  both,  then  is  the  origin  of  this  succes- 
sion, according  to  Cyprian,  the  council  of  Nice,  Theodoret,  and 
Dr.  Pearson,  infamous,  uncanonical,  and  invalid. 

Ruffinus  again  affirms  that  Linus,  Cletus,  and  Clemens  all 
held  the  see  of  Rome,  during  the  life-time  of  St.  Peter,'  and 
thus  is  it  trebly  sure  that  Peter  never  transmitted  his  apostle- 
ship,  in  the  plenitude  of  episcopal  grace,  through  the  Romish 
succession. 

"  It  may  now  be  inquired,"  to  use  the  words  of  Mr.  Bower, 
in  his  History  of  the  Popes,  and  who  gives  abundant  evidence  to 
show  that  there  is  every  doubt,  whether  Peter  ever  was  at 
Rome,  and  that  it  is  certain  he  never  was  the  bishop  of  that 
place,  as  that  word  is  now  understood,  —  "  if  St.  Peter,"  says 
he  "  was  bishop  of  Rome,  who  placed  him  in  that  see  ?  Did 
our  Lord  appoint  him?  Did  the  apostles  name  him  ?  Did  the 
people  choose  him  ?  To  these  queries  no  answers  have  been 
yet  given,  but  such  as  are  so  ridiculously  weak,  that  it  is  not 
worth  my  while  to  relate  them,  nor  the  readers  to  hear  them." 

1)  See  Cyprian,  as  quoted  in  full,  5)  Epiph.  hcer.  7.Bower,  ibid.p  6. 
in  Potter  on  Ch.  Gov.  p.  IGl,  162.  6)  Ruff,  in  Prsf.  and  Clem.  Re- 

2)  Bower,  ibid  p.  10.  cogn.  in  ibid  p.  5. 

3)  Ibid  p.  8.  7)  See  ibid,  p.  6,  et  preced. 

4)  See  Potter  on  Ch.  Gov.  p.  123. 


LECT.  viii.]        Peter's  successors  not  to  be  found.  193 

St.  Peter,  either  alone,  or  jointly  with  St.  Paul,  appointed  the 
other  hishops  of  Rome.  Now,  when  he  appointed  others,  did 
he  resign  his  episcopacy  or  retain  it  ?  If  he  resigned  it,  he  did 
not  die  bishop  of  Rome,  which  shakes  the  very  foundation  of 
the  pope's  claim  to  supremacy.  If  he  retained  it,  then  there 
were  two  bishops,  "  or  three,  or  even  four,"  as  some  would  make 
it,  "  on  the  same  see  at  one  time,"'  which,  according  to  the 
canons,  would,  of  itself,  blast  all  claim  to  validity  of  succession.2 

*•'  Upon  the  whole  matter,"  says  the  very  learned  Dr.  Cum- 
ber,'' "there  is  no  certainty  who  was  bishop  of  Rome  next  the 
apostles,  and  therefore  the  Romanists  (and  the  prelatists)  build 
upon  an  ill  bottom,  when  they  lay  so  great  weight  on  their 
personal  succession."  Cabassute,  the  learned  popish  historian 
of  the  councils,  says  of  the  whole  matter,  "it  is  a  very  doubtful 
question."*  Prideaux  assures  us  "  no  certainty  is  to  be  had." 
Howell,  another  thorough  churchman,  after  fully  exposing  what 
he  calls  the  stupidity  and  l^ibles  of  the  Romanists  on  this  point, 
adds,  "hence  it  is  evident,  how  very  doubtful  and  uncertain  is 
the  personal  succession  of  the  Roman  bishops."  Platina  ac- 
knowledges that  the  authorities  on  the  succession  of  the  popes 
are  full  of  confusion.^  Of  this  and  the  whole  series  of  succes- 
sions, Bishop  Hoadly  remarks,  "  the  learned  must  have  the  least 
assurance,  and  the  unlearned  can  have  no  notion"  whatever,  "but 
through  ignorance  and  credulity."* 

It  is  scarce  possible,  in  the  nature  of  things,  that  such  facts  could 
come  down  to  us  fully  authenticated,  through  three  centuries  of 

1)  Bower,  vol.  i.  p.  8.  Willet,  Syn.  Pap.  p.  67,  and  Fulke's 

2)  Tliis  uncertainty  will  be  appa-  Conf.  Rheni.  Test.  Rom.  16,  §  4. 
rent  from  tlie  following  table,  which  Also  Riddle's  Ecclesiastical  Chro- 
will  at  once  show  how  the  fathers  nology,  p.  60.  CaJaniy's  Def.  of  Non- 
differ  and  contradict  one  the  other.  It  conformity,  vol.  i.  p.  163,  Lond.  1703. 
is  taken  from  Hanbury's  edition  of  "  Would  it  not,"  says  Calamy, 
Hooker,  (Lond.  1)^30,  vol.   iii.  p.  100.)  "  tempt  a  man  to  wonder,  after  all  this, 

Authorities. —  Irenceus,    century    II.  to  find  such  a  stir  made  about  the  ta- 

1.  Linns  made  bishop  by   Peter  and  bles    of    succession     in    the     several 

Paul;  2.  Anacletus  ;  3.  Clement.  churches  from  the  time  of  the   apos- 

Tertullian,   century    II.      Clement  ties,  as  a  proof  that  diocesan  episeopa- 

first  after  Peter.  cy  had  its  rise  from  them  .'     Alas,  the 

Eusebius,  century  IV.     Linus  first  head  of  the  Nile  is  not  more  obscure 

after  martyrdom  of  Peter.  than  the  first   part   of  these    tables." 

Origen,  century  III,  ibid.  Vol.  i.  p.  162.     See  this  further  illus- 

Epiphanius,  century  IV.  Peter  and  trated  by  Mr.  Drew,  in   Dr.   Bancrs's 

Paul.  Original  Church  of  Christ,  p.  216.  ° 

Damasus,    century    IV.    Peter   25  3)   Roman  Forgeries  in  Councils 

years;  came  to  Rome  in  the   begin-  Part  I.  c.  1.  in  Powell  p.   107,  where, 

ning   of   Nero's  reign.    (N-  B.    Nero  see  the  testimony  of  Cabassute. 
reigued  but  14  years.)  4)  See  quoted  in  Powell  on  Apos- 

Jerome,  century  V.  Peter  2-5  years ;  tolical  Succ.  p.  107. 
till  last  year  of  Nero's  reign.  5)  See  Ibid,  pp.  ]08, 109. 

On   the  uncertainty   of  these  first  6)  See  also  Calvin  Instit.  B.  iv. 

links  in  the  succession,  see  also  Dr.  eh.  6,  §  15,  vol.  ii.  p.  275. 

25 


194  Peter's  successors  not  to  be  found.        [lect.  viii. 

almost  uninterrupted  persecution,  during  which  records  were  not 
reo;ularly  kept,  if  kept  at  all  —  for  they  would  only  be  sources 
of  evidence  against  christians  —  and  when,  if  attempted,  they 
were  so  likely  to  be  destroyed/  The  whole  question,  therefore, 
as  to  the  origination,  and  the  first  successions  in  the  church  at 
Rome,  as  was  the  case  with  hard  questions  in  the  court  of  the 
Areopagites,  may  be  postponed  ad  diem  longissimam.  It  is  a 
gordian  knot,  which  all  the  ingenuity  of  man  can  never  untie. 

But,  nevertheless,  upon  its  resolution  depends  the  whole  order 
of  the  Romish  prelatical  succession;  and  upon  this  depends  the 
succession  of  the  prelatic  Church  of  England  ;  and  upon  this  de- 
pends the  succession  of  the  protestant  episcopal  church  in  this 
country  —  and  upon  this,  the  whole  system  of  the  prelacy,  with 
all  its  claims  to  exclusive  prerogative  and  divine  right.  The 
whole  Christianity  of  these  churches  is,  by  their  high-church  de- 
fenders, interwoven  with  the  unbroken  order  of  a  lineal  episcopal 
succession,  from  the  apostles  to  the  very  individuals  by  whom 
they  are  now  governed,  and  in  whom  the  mysterious  gift  resides, 
to  be  in  like  manner  transmitted,  by  their  manipulations,  to  all 
succeeding  prelates,  to  the  end  of  time.  The  foundation  of  this 
stupendous  system,  on  which  our  destiny  as  a  church,  as  they 
would  teach,  hangs  trembling,  we  have  now  examined,  and  the 
first  and  most  essential  link  in  this  chain  we  have  brought  to 
the  test  of  historical  fact,  and  they  have  been  found,  tekel.  They 
are  unsound.  They  are  brittle.  They  are  worse,  for  they  are 
mere  fables,  and  a  huge  mass  of  endless  genealogies.  This 
boasted  foundation  is  infinitely  too  small  for  such  an  immense 
structure.  That  "huge  and  hoary  castellated  edifice,"  to  which 
these  rulers  of  a  subjugated  world  would  betake  themselves, 
"  closely  tenanted"  as  it  is,  "  even  to  the  very  attics,"  with  mitred 
heads  and  robed  dignitaries,  is  leaning  toward  its  fall ;  the  wash- 
ing tide,  at  every  flow,  wastes  more  and  more  its  insecure  foun- 
dation ;  and  while  it  overhangs  the  fearful  gulf  below,  the  touch 
of  history  is  alone  sufficient  to  make  this  stately  church  a  heap 
of  ruins. 

1)  See  Hill's  Lect.  vol.  iii.  p.  432,  8vo  ed. 


LECTURE    IX. 


THE  PRELATICA.I.  DOCTRINE    OF   APOSTOLICAL    SUCCESSION    BROUGHT  TO 
THE  TEST  OF  HISTORY. 


THE     SUBJECT     CONCLUDED. 


The  question  involved  in  this  prelatic  doctrine  is,  we  are  told, 
one  of  facts.  Such  is  the  representation  given  of  it  by  its  ad- 
vocates, and  we  are  reminded,  that  by  its  accordance  with  the 
facts  of  history  must  it  stand  or  fall.  On  this  subject,  we  have 
already  given  the  opinion  of  several  writers. 

But  the  same  ground  is  as  confidently  assumed  by  prelatists 
in  this  country,  as  will  appear  from  the  following  statement 
given  by  the  Rev.  William  Staunton,  in  his  Dictionary  of  the 
Church.i  In  explaining  this  doctrine  of  "  uninterrupted  succes- 
sion,"* this  writer  traces,  as  he  supposes,  the  regular  "  links  of 
the  chain,"  in  historical  progression  from  Christ  downwards. 
He  defines  the  doctrine  thus :  It  is  "  a  perfect  and  unbroken 
transmission  of  the  original  ministerial  commission  from  the 
apostles  to  iheir  successors,  by  the  progressive  and  perpetual 
conveyance  of  their  powers  from  one  race  of  bishops  (i.  e.  pre- 
lates) to  another." 

"  The  validity  of  the  ministry,"  as  he  allows,  "  depended  alto- 
gether on  the  legitimacy  of  its  derivation  from  the  apostles, — 
and  therefore,  "  infinite  care  was  taken,  in  the  consecration  of 
bishops,  to  see  that  the  ecclesiastical  pedigree  of  their  consecra- 
tors  was  regular  and  indisputable."  "  And  1  suppose,"  he 
quotes  with  approbation,  "  it  cannot  bear  any  dispute,  but  that  it 
is  now  more  easily  to  be  proved  that  the  archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury was   CANONICALLY  ordaincd,  than  that  any  person  now 

1)  N.  York,  1839, 2nd.  ed.  2)  See  p.  458,  &c. 


196  THE    SUCCESSION    HAS   NO    BEGINNING.  [lECT.    IX. 

living  is  the  son  of  him  who  is  called  his  father ;  and  that  the 
same  might  have  been  said  of  any  archbishop  or  bishop,  that 
ever  sat  in  that  or  any  other  episcopal  see,  during  the  time  of 
his  being  bishop."  "  Such,  then,  is  the  uninterrupted  succes- 
sion ;  a  FACT  to  which  every  bishop,  priest,  and  deacon,  in  the 
wide  world,  looks  as  the  ground  of  validity  in  his  okders. 
Without  this,  all  distinction  between  a  clergyman  and  a  layman, 
is  utterly  vain,  for  no  security  exists  that  heaven  will  ratify  the 
acts  of  an  illegally  constituted  minister  on  earih.  With- 
out it,  ordination  confers  none  but  humanly  derived  powers  ; 
and  what  those  are  worth,  the  reader  n)ay  estimate,  when  we  tell 
him,  that  on  proof  of  a  real  fracture  in  the  line  of  transmission 
between  the  first  bishops  of  the  American  church  and  the  in- 
spired apostles,  the  present  bishops  will  freely  acknowledge 
themselves  to  be  mere  laymen,  and  humbly  retire  from  their 
posts.'" 

Now,  if  this  line  of  succession  is  firm  any  where,  it  nmst 
surely  be  so  at  its  commencement.  We  have  therefore  entered 
at  some  length  upon  an  examination  of  the  first  links  of  this 
boasted  hierarchy. 

It  may,  we  suppose,  be  safely  assumed  as  an  axiom,  that 
what  has  no  bejiinning  can  have  no  continuance  and  no  end. 
And  yet  here,  at  the  very  outset  of  this  gorgeous  procession  of 
popes  and  prelates,  with  their  two  attendant  orders  of  priests 
and  deacons,  and  after  the  most  diligent  search,  we  can  discov- 
er no  head  —  since  that  Peter  ever  was  at  Rome,  is  a  matter  of 
great  uncertainty,  —  that  he  was  ever  bishop  of  Rome  utterly 
incredible  —  and  that  he  was  the  first  of  an  order  of  popes  or 
diocesan  prelates,  an  assumption  without  any  manner  of  proof, 
human  or  divine. 

And  while  we  are  taught  to  believe  that  "order  is  heaven's 
first  law,"  this  august  pageantry  is  led  on  by  a  host  of  crowded 
candidates  for  primacy  and  succession,  who  can  be  reduced  to 
no  terms  ;  and  between  whose  rival  claims  the  universal  church 
has,  as  yet,  been  unable  to  decide.  Where,  with  "peremptory 
expectation,"  we  look  for  assured  certainty  ;  all  is  doubt,  ambi- 
guity, and  confusion.  Not  one  single  canon  we  have  laid  down, 
has  been  met  in  the  attempted  substantiation  of  the  very  first 
links  in  the  chain.  The  facts  themselves,  and  every  thing 
about  the  facts  of  any  importance,  are  equally  covered  with 
mysterious  darkness.  Taking,  therefore,  the  Bible  as  our  guide, 
and  appealing  to  historic  fact  as  our  evidence,  "  we  spurn  with- 

1)  So  under  "  Schism,"  p.  418,  he  rial  authority  without  which  there  can 
speaks  of  that  "  succession  of  ministe-      be  no  church." 


LECT.  IX.]  THIS    SUCCESSION   HAS   NO    CONTINUANCE.  197 

out  a  doubt,"  the  long  train  of  pernicious  absurdities,  which 
are  involved  in  this  dogma  of  an  unbroken  prelatical  succession.' 

"  If,"  says  the  author  of  "  The  Rights  of  the  Christian  Church,"^ 
himself  an  episcopalian,  "there  is  a  line  of  succession  on  which 
the  very  being  of  the  church  depends,  happy  they  who  lived  in 
the  earliest,  when  the  line  was  entire  ;  while  we,  at  so  great  a 
distance,  can  meet  with  nothing  except  uncertainty,  perplexity, 
and  despair.  How  can  the  majority  of  the  christian  world,  the 
simple  and  unlearned,  judge  when  this  line  is  broke,  and  when 
not  ?  What  can  be  more  absurd,  than  to  send  them  to  fathers, 
councils,  and  church  history,  for  their  information  ?  If  there 
was  a  particular  set  of  men  who,  under  a  certain  form,  were  to 
govern  the  church,  and  this  was  necessary  to  its  being,  Infinite 
Goodness  would  no  doubt  have  made  it  most  conspicuous  to 
the  bulk  of  mankind  who  they  are.  But  what  other  judg- 
ment, upon  this  hypothesis,  can  the  most  knowing  make,  than 
that  'tis  placing  the  government  of  the  church  on  such  a  foot  as 
must  destroy  the  church  itself." 

"  It  is  probable,"  says  Dr.  Claggett,^  "  that  the  Roman  church 
wants  the  first,  —  and  that  there  is  now  no  true  pope,  or  has 
been  for  many  ages,  for  that  church  to  be  united  to.  For  by 
their  own  confession,  a  pope  simoniacally  chosen,  a  pope  intrud- 
ed by  violence,  a  heretic,  nay,  more,  an  atheist  or  an  infidel,  is 
no  true  pope.  And  many  such  there  have  been,  of  one  sort  or 
other,  whose  acts,  therefore,  in  creating  cardinals,  &c.,  being  in- 
valid, it  is  exceedingly  probable  that  the  whole  succession  has 
upon  this  account  failed  long  ago."  For,  as  he  adds,  "  while 
there  was  no  certain  pope,  there  could  be  no  certainty  of  the 
validity  of  any  acts  necessary  to  continue  a  succession  of  true 
popes." 

Passing  now  from  this  threshold  of  the  temple,  and  entering 
within  the  wide  portals,  which,  like  those  of  Egyptian  Thebes, 
bespeak  for  the  divinity  worshipped  there,  a  power  and  glo- 
ry coextensive  with  our  spiritual  nature;  we  find  ourselves 
mournfully  impressed  with  the  striking  analogy  in  the  fate  of 
both.  All  is  "  ruin  wild  and  waste."  The  mighty  fabric  of 
ages  has  fallen.  Its  collossal  pillars  are  in  the  dust.  Its  glory 
and  its  garniture  are  no  more.  The  sands  of  the  desert  have 
overwhelmed,  even  the  dilapidated  relics  which  lie  far  buried 
beneath  their  increasing  mass.  Such  is  the  prospect  which 
opens  before  the  inquirer,  who  undertakes  to  trace  out  the  relics 
of  this  apostolic   succession,  amid  the  desert  wastes  of  church 

1)  See  Spiritual  Desp.  p.  327.  3)  Notes  of  the  Church,  p.  181. 

2)  P.  350,  Lond.  1707,  ed.  third. 


198  THIS   StrCCESSION   HAS   NO    CONTINUANCE.  [LECT.  IX. 

history.  Confusion  thickens  upon  him  at  every  step,  while  his 
covetous  guides  become  the  more  vainly  confident  and  garru- 
lous, just  in  proportion  as  the  absence  of  all  marks  of  truth  leave 
room  for  imagination  to  weave  its  fictions,  and  superstition  to 
enforce  its  drean)S. 

"  The  religious  system  professed  in  the  christian  church  had, 
in  the  course  of  two  hundred  years,  reckoning  from  the  death 
of  the  last  of  the  apostles,  become  capitally  distinguished 
from  the  Christianity  of  the  apostles.'"  Already  had  the  prela- 
cy erected  itself  into  an  established  system,  and  triumphed  over 
the  lower  orders,  now  reduced  to  comparative  vassalage  ;  and  over 
the  laity,  now  excluded  from  their  rightful  participation  in  the 
administration  of  the  affairs  of  the  church.  Of  course,  every 
thing  was  made  to  conspire  to  the  glorification  of  this  first  order 
of  the  ministry  —  the  prelates  —  who  were  in  the  third  century 
formally  inducted  into  the  office  and  undisputed  title  of  suc- 
cessors of  the  apostles.*^ 

Very  little  credence  can  therefore  be  given  to  the  tales  re- 
corded of  their  own  greatness  and  inherent  dignity,  by  those 
who  persecuted,  even  to  banishment  or  death,  such  refractory 
sons  of  the  church  as  dared  to  question  their  title-deeds  of  offi- 
cial sanctity  and  supremacy. 

Of  all  authorities  drawn  from  the  fathers  in  support  of  this 
system,  we  may  say,  many  are  to  no  purpose  —  many  are  am- 
biguous —  many  refer  simply  to  authority  and  office,  without 
determining  the  meaning  of  the  words,  and  are  irrelevant  — 
many  are  spurious  and  forged  —  and  all  are  the  declarations  of 
men,  taught  to  believe  that  the  advantage  of  the  church  was  to 
be  sought  as  paramount  to  all  other  claims  whatever."* 

The  line  of  prelatic  succession,  therefore,  which  wants  co- 
herence at  its  very  starting  point,  becomes  more  and  more  at- 
tenuated, until  we  find  it  broken  by  a  thousand  intersecting 
claims,  decree;,  anathemas,  canons,  and  usurpations.  By  mak- 
ing diocesan  prelates  the  only  representatives  and  successors  of 
the  apostles,  the  standing  of  all  the  churches  in  the  first  and 
purest  ages  is  for  ever  blasted  ;  since  there  was  no  such  offi- 
cial personage  as  a  prelate,  to  be  found  in  all  their  catalogues 
—  no  dioceses  having  been  erected  until  the  fourth  century.* 
The  same  conclusion  may  be   drawn  from   innumerable  other 

1)  Spirit.  Desp.  p.  32G,  and  Anct.  4)  Palmer,  vol.  ii.  p.  544,  and  full 
Christ,  part  5th.  on  in  Clarkson's  Primitive  Episcop.  p. 

2)  See  Binjjham,  b.  2,  ch.  2,  and  226  and  230 ;  Baynes'  Diocesan's  Try- 
Cyprian  in  Schism,  p.  124.  all,  Lond.  1621,  where  this  subject  is 

3)  See    Palmer  on  the   Church,  fully   argued.     Baxter's   Treatise  on 
vol.  ii.  part  7,  ch.  3.  Episcopacy,  Lond.  1681,  part  i. 


LECT.  IX.]    THE    ROMISH   SUCCESSION   HERETICAL    AND   VILE.  199 

facts,  having  reference  to  the  subject,  the  form,  and  the  minis- 
ters, in  the  case  of  each  separate  consecration.  But  it  is  ako- 
gether  unnecessary  to  go  into  this  investigation  at  any  length. 
Contested  elections,  —  the  decrees  of  councils  —  the  rivalry  of 
opposing  claimants  —  excommunications,  anathemas,  and  deposi- 
tions, which  affected  all  the  acts  of  the  individuals  to  whom  they 
applied — the  intrigue,  violence,  and  bloodshed,  with  which 
such  contests  for  office  were  carried  on,  —  the  undenied,  because 
undeniable  atrocity,  atheism,  infidelity,  licentiousness,  heresy, 
and  murder,  which  characterized  many  in  this  "  unbroken  suc- 
cession,"— these  facts,  which  even  Baronius  could  not  deny,  who 
confesses  that,  in  a  succession  of  fifty  popes,  there  was  not  a  pious 
man  —  that  there  were  no  popes  at  all  for  years  together  —  at 
other  times  two  or  three  at  once  —  and  between  twenty  and 
thirty  schisms,  one  of  which  lasted  for  thirty  years'  —  these 
plain  and  incontestable  facts  render  all  such  investigations  su- 
pererogatory to  the  clear  decision  of  this  question.  It  never  yet 
has  been  determined  what  popes  have  been  true  popes  —  which 
of  the  rival  claimants  are  to  be  received — nor  what  councils 
are  to  be  our  guide  in  coming  to  a  conclusion.' 

But,  again,  we  are  taught,  as  by  Bellarmine,  that  heresy, 
when  held  by  any  church,  and  persisted  in  by  that  church,  is 
sufficient  to  destroy  its  claim  to  be  a  true  church.^  Now,  that 
which  is  of  sufficient  potency  to  overthrow  the  pretensions  of 
any  body  to  the  character  of  a  church,  must  necessarily  be  de- 
structive, also,  of  the  claims  of  such  a  body  to  an  apostolical 
succession,  since  this  is,  itself,  one  of  the  assigned  marks  of  a 
true  church.  And  will  any  man  venture  to  deny,  that  among 
those  whose  names  are  necessary  to  make  up  the  line  of  this 
prelatical  succession,  there  have  been  many  who  have  been 
avowed  heretics,  and  who  have  employed  all  their  influence 
for  the  promotion  of  heresy  ?  Was  not  this  the  case  with 
Zepherynus,  Marcellinus,  Liberius,  Felix,  Anastasius,  Hono- 
rius,  and,  not  to  enlarge,  with  John  the  XXIII.,  who  denied  a 
future  life  ?* 

1)  See  in  Neal's  Puritans,  vol.  iv.  4)  See  Bishop  Williams  in  Notes 
p.  211,  and  Edgar's  Variations  of  of  the  Ch.  p.  102.  Also,  Dr.  Thorpe 
Popery,  and  Newman  on  Romanism,     in  ibid,  pp.  131,  132,  §  7. 

lect.  xiv.  "  Infallible  Heads   of   the   Infallible 

2)  See  this  strongly  urged  against  Church^  —  "  John  XXII.  was  a  here- 
Romanists,  (though  the  author  was  tic,  and  denied  the  immortality  of  the 
committing  suicide,)  by  Mr.  Newman  soul.  John  XXIII.  Gregory  XII.,  and 
on  Romanism,  pp.  151,  152,  and  see  Benedict  XIII.,  were  all  popes  and 
Palmer,  vol.  ii.  part  6,  ch.  vi.  p.  432,  infallible  heads  of  the  church  at  the 
&c.  And  against  prelatists  generally,  same  time,  and  the  council  of  Con- 
in  Plea  for  Presb.  1840,  p.  84,  «&c.  stance  cashiered  the  whole  of  them  as 

3)  De  Not  lib.  iv.  cap.  8.  Palmer  illegitimate.  The  council  of  Basil 
on  the  Ckurch. 


200 


THE    ANGLICAN    SUCCESSION   BROKEN. 


[lect.  IX. 


Without  attempting  to  go  into  any  consecutive  or  elaborate 
examination  of  the  history  of  this  succession,  some  general  re- 
marks may  be  satisfactory  to  those  who  have  not  access  to  other 
sources  of  information.  Not  to  speak  further  of  tlie  asserted 
unchristian  character  of  the  Romish  prelatical  succession,  it  can, 
we  think,  be  clearly  shown,  that  many  links  are  defective  and 
invalid,  even  in  the  chain  of  the  Anglican  succession,  and  that  it 
can  be  made  to  rest  upon  no  tenable  or  sufficient  ground. 

It  can  be  clearly  shown,  we  say,  that  many  links  are  defective 
and  invalid,  even  in  the  chain  of  the  Anglican  succession. 

At  a  certain  period,  the  see  of  Armagh  was  occupied  for  eight 
generations  by  individuals  who  had  never  received  any  ordina- 
tion ivhatever.  Hooker  admits  that  ordinations  had  oftentimes 
been  effected  without  a  bishop  to  ordain,  "and  therefore,"  he 
says,  "  we  are  not  simply,  without  exception,  to  urge  a  lineal  de- 
scent of  power  from  the  apostles,  by  continued  succession  of 
bishops  in  every  effectual  ordination."^  Stillingfleet  declares, 
that  "  by  the  loss  of  records  of  the  British  churches,  we  cannot 
draw  down  the  succession  of  bishops  from  the  apostles'  times. "^ 
There  is,  in  fact,  no  reckoning  for  the  first  five  hundred  and 
ninety-six  years,  until  the  time  when  Augustine  was  sent  from 
Rome  to  re-establish  Christianity  in  Britain.^     Nor  is  the  record 


.convicted  Pope  Eun-enius  of  schism 
and  heresy.  Pope  ftlarcelHnus  actu- 
ally sacrificed  to  idols.  Pope  Liberins 
was  an  Arian,  and  subscribed  to  that 
creed.  Anastatius  was  excommuni- 
cated as  a  heretic  by  his  own  clergy. 
Silvester  II.  sacrificed  to  the  devil. 
Formosus  was  promoted  to  the  chair 
through  perjury.  Sergius  III.  caused 
his  predecessor's  body  to  be  dug  out  of 
the  grave,  its  head  cut  off,  and  then 
flung  into  the  Tiber.  Boniface  de- 
posed, imprisoned,  and  then  plucked 
out  tlie  eyes  of  his  predecessor.  In  a 
word,  many  of  the  popes  have  been 
atlieists,  rebels,  murderers,  conjurors, 
adulterers  and  sodomites.  Papal 
Rome  has  far  exceeded  'n  crime  her 
pagan  predecessor.  It  is  not,  there- 
fore, to  be  wondered  at  that  the  popes, 
though  always  assuming  a  new  name, 
yet  never  take  the  name  of  Peter.  It 
is  a  curious  fact  that  they  .always  shun 
it.  Those  who  have  received  that 
name  at  the  font  have  always  changed 
it  when  they  reached  the  chair.  Pe- 
trns  de  Tarantasis  cliano-pd  his  name 
to  Innocent  IV.  PctrusCaraf became 
Paul  V.  Sergius  III  's  christian  name 
was  Peter.  This  practice  looks  like 
conscious  guilt.     I'hey  fear  the  name 


of  Peter  would  but  too  plainly  show 
their  apostacy  from  the  apostle  Peter's 
virtues ;  and  men  would  be  apt  to 
exclaim,  "  how  unlike  is  Peter  the 
pope  to  Peter  the  apostle."  Stevens' 
Spirit  of  the  Church  of  Rome.  See 
Note  A 

1)  Eccl.  Polity,  b.  11). 

2)  Origines  BritannicEe,  Lond., 
1685,  pp  81,  8;?. 

3)  "  Thus  far,  indeed,  we  have  no 
mention  of  bishops  in  the  British 
church,  nor  do  we  find  any  further 
information  on  the  subject  at  all, 
until  the  year  314."  Rev.  Henry  Gary 
on  "  the  Apostolical  succession  in  the 
Church  of  England,"  p.  8. 

According  to  Mr.  Jones,  of  Oswes- 
tree,  in  his  Historical  Treatise  "  of 
the  Heart  and  its  True  Sovereign," 
there  was  left  in  England  in  CfiS,  but 
one  remaining  successor  of  Augustine 
and  his  monks,  and  tiiat  was  Winet,  a 
Simonist.  All  the  rest  of  the  bishops 
were  of  British  ordination,  who,  as 
this  same  divine  of  the  Engli.sli  church 
testifii's,  all  di'uied  their  ordination 
from  Scotch  presbyters.  See  Baxter's 
True  and  Only  Way  of  Concord, 
Lond.  1(!80.     Premonition,  II. 

"  A  long  interval  of  heathen  dark- 


LECT.  IX.]  THE    ANGLICAN    SUCCESSION    DEFECTIVE.  201 

of  these  five  hundred  and  ninety-six  years,  any  better  kept  at 
Rome  than  in  Britain  ;  for  if  we  come  to  RonTe,  says  Stillingfleet, 
"  here  the  succession  is  as  muddy  as  the  Tiber  itself,"  and  "  what 
shall  we  say  to  extricate  ourselves  out  of  this  labyrinth  ?'"  Who 
can  tell  the  date  of  the  consecration  of  Augustine,  about  which  a 
late  prelatic  advocate  differs  from  himself  in  the  small  amount  of 
fifty-four  years,  and  in  reference  to  which  we  find  Baronius  contra- 
dicting Bede,  and  Dr.  Inett  making  confusion  worse  confounded  T 
The  archbishopric  of  Canterbury,  says  Dr.  Inett,  in  his  Origines 
Anglicanae,  had  been  void  from  the  year  1089,  in  all,  about  four 
years,  and  the  bishopric  of  Lincoln  about  a  year.  Towards  the 
end  of  the  eighth  century,  this  same  see  was  divided  into  two 
parts  for  several  years.  Dr.  Inett  himself  affirms,  that  "the 
difficulties  in  that  see  betwixt  the  year  763  and  the  year  800, 
were  invincible."^  Speaking  of  the  death  of  Dunstan,  this  writer 
further  states,  that  Elihelgar  "succeeded  to  the  chair  of  Canter- 
bury the  year  following,  but  dying  the  same  year,  our  historians 
are  not  agreed  who  succeeded,  some  confidently  pronouncing  in 
favor  of  Siricius.  and  others  of  Elfricus.'*'' 

It  is  also  known  that  in  the  dark  ages,  there  were  many 
Scotchmen  calling  themselves  bishops,  who  travelled  over  Eng- 
land, and  of  whom  it  is  believed  that  some  at  least  were  settled  in 
bishoprics,  who  ordained  many  ;  and  yet  they  are  represented  in 
the  public  acts  made  against  them,  to  be  of  very  "  uncertain 
ordination."* 

It  must  be  further  stated  that,  as  the  whole  virtue  of  Augus- 
tine's ministrations  depends  on  the  pre-established  validity  of 
the  Romish  succession,  so  also,  as  Fox  relates,  the  first  seven 
of  the  prelates  of  Canterbury  "were  Italians  or  foreigners."® 
The  pope  has  also  frequently  consecrated  archbishops  of  Can- 
terbury, as  appears  from  Godwin's  lives  of  the  English  bishops.'' 

But  it  has  been  already  made  to  appear,  that  no  dependence 
whatever  can  be   placed  upon  the  Romish  succession,  either  as 

npss  now  followed,  (i.  e.  the  death  of  1)  frenicum.  pirt  2,  ch.  vi. 

Germanus  in  448,)  to  wit,  until  the  2)  See  Plea  lor  Presbytery,  Glas- 

arrival  of  Autjustin  from  Rome,  A.  D.  gow,  1840,  p.  77. 

596,"  that  is,'-  a  century  and  a  half."  3)  See  quoted  in  Plea  for  Presby- 

Rev.  Henry  Gary  on  the  Apostolical  tery,  p.  78,  from  the  original. 

Succ.  in  the  Brit.  Ch.  p   12.  "  When,  4)  Ibid,  p.  79. 

however,  the  re-introduction  of  chris-  5)  See   specimens   in   Selden,  as 

tianity    was  resolved  on  by   Oswald,  quoted  in   ibid,  p.  79. 

who  recovered  his  kingdom  of  North-  6)  Book  of  Martyrs  quoted  in  ibid, 

urnberland,  that  prince,  who  had  lived  p   80. 

many  years  among  the  Scots,  obtain-  7)  See  in  Plea  for  Presbytery  p. 

ed  a   bishop    from  that   country  who  80,  and  in  Powell  on  Ap.  Succession. 

brought  with  him  the  usages  of  the  "  Is  it  not  true,  (Archer's  Six  Lect. 

Scottish  church,"  that    is,  presbyteri-  on  Piiseyism,  lect.  v.)  that  twenty-nine 

anism.    Ibid  in  ibid,  p.  17.  archbishops  of  the  Church  of  England, 

26 


202 


THE    IRISH    SUCCESSION    DEFECTIVE. 


[LECT. IX. 


to  its  Christianity,  or  its  continuity,  or  its  validity,  and  hence  all 
claims  deriving  their  authority  from  it,  must  he  rejected. 

The  same  remarks  are  applicahle  to  the  Irish  sees,  in  some 
of  which,  even  the  names  of  many  of  the  incumhenls  are  un- 
known.' From  Patrlcius  upwards,  for  a  space  of  four  hundred 
years,  there  is  no  record  or  certainty.  That  he  had  no  connexion 
whatever  with  Rome,  is  affirmed  by  many  of  the  ablest  anti- 
quarians.* According  to  the  very  best  authorities,  eight  prelates 
in  succession  from  Patrick  were  loithout  orders.'^ 

Notwithstanding  the  undeniable  certainty  of  many  such  facts 
as  these  now   produced,  we  are  actually  challenged  to  exhibit 


between  the  seventh  and  the  fifteenth 
centuries,  were  ordained  directly  by 
the  pope,  or  by  the  pope's  legate  ? 
What  do  you  make  of  their  '  apostoli- 
cal succession  ?  '  iVay  more,  the  arch- 
bishop of  Yorli,  Chichely,  was  ordain- 
ed by  Gregory  the  Twelfth,  one  of  the 
three  pojies  who  were  at  that  time  con- 
tending for  tile  tiara,  and  who  were 
all  of  them  deposed.  What  do  you 
make  of  .ill  those  whom  he  ordained  ? 
What  do  you  make  of  their  '  apostol- 
ical succession  ?  '  Was  it  valid  or 
not?  '■ 

"Out  of  36  archbishops  of  Canter- 
bury prior  to  Cranmer,  12  have  been 
consecrated  by  the  popes,  so  that 
through  this  source  the  Romish  suc- 
cession has  been  introduced  twelve 
times."  Rev.  Henry  Gary  on  the 
Apostolical  Succession  in  the  Church 
of  England,  p.  IS. 

1)  See  in  Plea  for   Presb.  pp.  81, 
82. 

2)  As    Dr.    Monck   Mason,   &c. 
see  ibid,  p.  82. 

Indeed,  the  very  existence  of  such 
a  character  as  St.  Patrick  is  denied, 
and  the  whole  legend  regarded  as  a 
fabulous  story.  Such  was  the  opinion 
of  Ledwich  in  his  Antiquities  of  Ire- 
land; Gordon  in  his  History  of  Ireland, 
&c.  See  Stuart's  History  of  Armagh, 
1819,  Introductory  Dissertation. 

3)  Ibid. 

As  to  the  succession  in  Ireland.  Mr. 
Stuart  in  his  Dissertation  on  the  State 
of  the  Ancient  Irish  Church,  (Hist,  of 
Armagh,  p.  G22,  app.  xiii.  and  623, 
624,)  says,  "  after  the  decease  of  the 
Irish  apostle,  ecclesiastical  dignities 
wf>re  soon  monopolized  by  certain 
princely  families,  and  transmitted  in 
the  same  sept  from  generation  to  gen- 
eration. Even  in  Armagh,  the  prima- 
tial  right  seema  to  have  been  convert- 


ed into  a  kind  of  property,  by  a  par- 
ticular branch  of  the  Hi  Nial  race, 
which  was  probably  sprung  from  Oaire 
the  donor  of  Druimsaillech,  to  the 
founder  of  the  see.  St.  Bernard  rep- 
robates this  practice  in  very  vehement 
terms.  He  styles  it  "  an  execrable 
succession,"  and  affirms,  tliat  prior  to 
the  primacy  of  Celsus,  the  see  had 
been  thus  held  by  fifteen  successive 
generations.  "  Verum,"  says  he, 
"  mos  pessimus  inoleverat  quorundam 
diabolica  ambitione  potentum  sedem 
sanctum  obtentum  iri  hereditaria  suc- 
cessione.  Nee  enim  patiebantur  epis- 
copari,  nisi  qui  essent  de  tribu  et  fa- 
milia  sua.  Nee  parurn  processerat 
EXECRANDA  succEssio  decursis  jam 
hac  malitia  quasi  generationibusquin- 
decim  et  eo  usque  finiiaverat  sibi  jus 
pravum  imo  omni  morte  puniendain 
injuriam  generatio  mala  et  adnltera, 
ut  etsi  interdum  defecissent  clerici  de 
sanguine  illo  sed  episcopi  nunquam." 
(Sanct.  Berni.  Vita  Mai.  apud  Mess. 
c.vii.  p.  358.  Vita  Mai.  ut  supra,  p. 
359.) 

"  In  the  twelfth  century,  Pope  Inno- 
cent HI.  directed  John  Salemitan,  his 
legate  in  Ireland,  to  have  the  practice 
abolislied  by  which  sons  and  grand- 
sons were  accustomed  to  succeed  their 
fatliers  and  grandfathers  in  ecclesiastic 
benefices.     (Alph.  Ciac.  Vit.  Pont.) 

"Lanfranc,  in  an  epistle  written  about 
the  year  1074,  to  Terdelvach,  king  of 
Ireland,  complains  that  in  the  Hiber- 
nian church,  as  constituted  at  that 
period,  bishops  were  often  consecrated 
by  a  single  bishop  —  that  Irish  chil- 
dren were  baptized  without  the  chrism 
—  and  that  holy  orders  were  granted 
by  the  prelates  for  money."  (Nazaren. 
Litt.  II.  p.  22.  Vet.  Epist.  Syllo.  p. 
72.) 


LECT.  IX.]  THE    ANGLICAN    SUCCESSION    DEFECTIVE.  203 

"  a  flaw  in  the  long  line  of  descent"  of  the  English  church; 
and  it  is  confidently  averred,  "  we  can  give  you  the  lists  of  our 
bishops  from  tiie  earliest  to  the  present  times.'" 

Tlie  bold  hardihood  with  which  such  assertions  are  made,  is 
truly  astonishing,  when  it  is  a  wellknown  fact,  that  some  of  the 
very  pontiffs  who  consecrated,  as  we  have  seen,  archbishops  of 
Canterbury,  were  afterwards  deposed,  and  all  their  former  eccle- 
siastical acts  pronounced  invalid.  Now,  since  the  English 
prelates  who  were  consecrated  by  these  archbishops,  never 
received  any  posterior  ordination,  all  their  acts  must  be  in  like 
manner,  null  and  void.  Thus,  for  instance,  Henry  Chicheley,  or 
Chichesley,  was  consecrated  by  Gregory  XII.,  who  had  been 
previously  condemned  in  council,  and  all  whose  acts  and  pro- 
ceedings were  formally  annulled  by  another  council  at  Con- 
stance, held  in  A.  D.,  1415.2  Chichesley,  however,  though 
himself  a  grievous  persecutor  of  the  true  church  of  Christ, 
nevertheless  continued  for  thirty  years  to  confer  orders  on  the 
bishops  and  other  clergy  of  the  Church  of  England.  Was  this 
not  a  flaw  in  the  line  of  English  descent  ?  Or  can  any  prelate  in 
existence  attempt  to  prove  that  his  succession,  when  traced  up 
through  past  ages,  will  not  be  found  to  lose  itself  in  some  such 
bottomless  abyss  ? 

As  prelatists  rest  their  claims  upon  an  unbroken  line  of  valid 
prelatical  succession,  it  is  incumbent  upon  them  to  make  mani- 
fest the  certain  existence  of  such  a  line  ;  and  failing  to  do  tliis, 
they  must  abandon  their  vain  assumptions.  It  is,  therefore,  un- 
necessary for  us  to  give  any  proof  of  an  actual  disruption  of  this 
chain.  Its  existence  may  be  fairly  denied,  until  this  is  produ. 
ced  ;  and  its  continuity  challenged,  until  positively  ascertained  by 
competent  judges. 

We  have,  however,  done  more  than  could  be  required  of  us. 
We  have  given  reasons  sufficient  to  invalidate  this  line,  both  as 
it  regards  its  commencement  and  its  continuance.  Now,  even 
could  our  opponents  remove  these  apparent  difficulties  in  every 
case  but  one,  and  there  should  remain  evidence  sufficient  to  de- 
stroy the  valid  connexion  of  the  parts  of  this  line  in  any  single 
case,  enough  is  left  to  invalidate  the  whole. 

But  there  is  still  remaining  one  general  view  of  the  subject, 
which  is  of  itself  sufficient  to  overthrow  all  claims  resting  upon 
the  assumed  validity,  as  a  medium  for  communicating  spiritual 
graces,  of  the  Romish  succession.  That  church,  considered  as 
the  papacy,  is,  and  has  been,  for  a  thousand,  or  perhaps  sixteen 

])  Letters  on  Episcopacy,  by  the  2)  See  Fox  in  Plea  for  Prcsb.  p. 

Rev.  A.  Boyd,  p   ICd.  92. 


204  THE    PAPACY    ANTICHRISTIAN.  [tECT.  IX. 

hundred  years,  an  apostate  system.  There  has  ever  been,  we 
beheve,  wilhui  it,  a  true  church,  composed  of  many  thousands 
or  milhons  now  in  glory.  But  llie  ecclesiastical  church  system, 
known  and  recognized  as  the  papacy,  has  been,  and  is  novv,anti- 
christian.' 

We  do  not  say  that  the  Romish  hierarchy  has  been,  or  that 
it  is,  exclusively  antichrist;  but  that  those  principles,  practices, 
and  doctrines,  by  which  that  apostacy  is  characterized  in  the 
word  of  God,  are  found  embodied  in  the  system  of  the  papacy. 
These  principles,  however,  we  believe  to  have  been  inherited 
by  the  present  hierarchy  from  that  of  an  age  anterior  to  the 
time  of  Constantine  ;  and  that  they  were  the  result  of  that  evil 
and  bitter  leaven  which  had  begun  to  diffuse  its  venomous  influ- 
ence even  when  the  apostles  still  presided  over  the  infant 
church.  There  is  the  popery  of  Cyprian  and  of  Dionysius,  of 
Chrysostom  and  Augustine,  of  Ambrose  and  of  Basil,  as  well 
as  of  Gregory  IX.;  and  there  is,  in  the  one  as  in  the  other  — 
differing  only  in  degree  —  the  same  corrupting  superstition,  and 
the  same  grasping  despotism. 

Now,  what  we  affirm  is,  that  the  Romish  church  regarded 
as  the  embodiment,  and  visible  exemplar  of  those  principles  and 
practices  which  we  denominate  —  to  abstract  them  from  their 
accidental  CO  nexion  with  Rome  —  the  prelacy  —  was  and  is 
esteemed,  and  upon  grounds  sufficient  for  every  man  who  would 
listen  to  the  warning  voice  of  reason  and  of  prudence,  as  anti- 
christian,  and  apostate.  Whatever  of  truth  she  may  retain,  it  is 
hidden,  darkened,  and  withdrawn  from  common  view,  by  the 
power  of  these  ensnaring  principles. 

As  antichristian,  was  this  system  testified  against  by  the  most 
ancient  Waldenses,   one  of  whose  oldest  treatises   is  on  anti- 

1)  "  This  conclusion,"  says  Bich-  Dr.  McCrie,  (Life  of  Knox,  vol.  i.  p. 
op  Hurd,  (Inrod.  to  Study  of  the  60,)  "  the  parallel  passages  in  the  New 
Proph.  Serm.  xii.  Lond.  183!^,  p.  239,)  Testament,  and  showed  that  the  king 
"  that  the  -pope  is  antichrist,  and  the  mentioned  in  his  text  was  the  same 
other,  tliat  the  scripturf,  is  the  elsewhere  called  the  man  of  sin,  the 
SOLE  RULE  OF  CHRISTIAN  FAITH,  Were  antichrist,  the  Babylonian  harlot ;  and 
the  two  great  principles,  on  which  the  that,  in  prophetical  style,  these  ex- 
reformation  was  originally  founded."  pressions  did  not  describe  a  single 
That  this  was  the  opinio'i  of  the  re  person,  but  a  body  or  multitude  of 
formers,  is,  says  Bishop  Van  Milderl,  people  under  a  wicked  head,  includ- 
certain,  as  also  of  modern  divines.  ing  a  succession  of  persons  occupying 
See  Boyle,  Lect.  vol.  i  pp.  312,  313.  the  same  place."  That  the  reformers 
"  Or  rather,'' he  says,  "  it  appears  to  be  and  tlieir  successors  freely,  without 
a  system  of  paganism  grafted  on  chris-  hesitation,  declared  popery  to  be  a 
tianity.  "  lbid,p.  314.  When  Knox  first  damnable  religion,  see  testified  by 
undertof)k  to  show  the  Romish  church  Scott  in  Hooker's  Wks.  vol.  i.  p.  91, 
to  be  "  the  synagocue  of  Satan,"  from  note,  Hanbury's  edit. 
Dan.  vii.  24,  25,"  he  compared,"  says 


LECT.  IX. 1 


THE    PAPACY    ANTICHRISTIAN. 


205 


Christ.'  As  such,  was  it  denounced  by  the  Albigenses,  who 
never  ceased  to  cry  aloud  and  bear  testimony  against  it,  even 
when  that  witness  insured  to  them  a  merciless  and  inhuman 
slaughter.*  As  such,  in  every  age,  was  it  held  up  to  view  by 
some  warning  voice,  although  too  generally  that  voice  was 
hushed  in  death,  ere  it  had  alarmed  the  slumbering  conscience 
of  the  thoughtless.^  From  the  fourth  century  downwards  to  the 
period  of  the  reformation,  this  system  of  church  principles  has 
been  branded  as  antichristian,  and  the  papacy  as  an  apostacy.* 
As  such,  was  it  reprobated,  as  with  one  voice,  by  all  the  re- 
formed churches — by  all  the  leaders  of  the  reformation,  —  and 
by  the  greatest  divines  from  that  period  until  the  present  hour.* 
Now,  when  any  visible  corporation  or  association,  calling 
itself  a  church,  or  church  of  Christ,  or  the  one  catholic  church, 
rejects  Christ's  commanded  doctrine,  and  teaches  lor  doctrines 
th&  commandments  of  men,  it  thereby  becomes,  ipso  facto,  apos- 
tate.* The  English  divines  unanimously  agree  that  now  the 
Romish  hierarchy  is  thus  apostate.'^  The  errors  of  that  church 
are  shown  to  be  even  damnable  to  those  who  might  know  them 
to  be  such,  and  yet  obstinately  persist  in  their  avowal.* 


1)  See  largely  quoted  in  Faber's 
Albigenses,  pp.  301,  370  -  373.  Also, 
pp  421,  420,  489.  See  the  treatise  it- 
self, given  in  Blair's  History  of  the 
Waldenses,  vol.  i.  appendix. 

2)  See  Faber's  Albio-enses,  pp.  89, 
92,93,  159,  161,  162,  248,  252.  The 
Pateirnes,  also,  accused  the  church  of 
Rome  of  being  the  seat  of  Satan. 
(See  Blair's  Waldenses,  vol.  i.  p.  193  ) 
Nine  bishops  in  Lombardy  and  the 
Grisons  rejected  the  pope  as  a  heretic 
in  the  sixth  century.  Blair's  Wal- 
denses, vol.  i.  p.  80. 

3)  See  the  testimony  of  Vigilan- 
tius  in  the  fourth  age  in  Faber. 

4)  See  ibid,  pp.  294,  295,  298, 
393.  That  it  was  so  in  the  eighth 
century,  as  proved  by  scripture,  and 
the  testimony  even  of  Romish  writers, 
see  shown  in  Nolan  on  the  Millen- 
ium, pp.  76-89,  et  passim. 

5)  See  Powell  on  A  pp.  Succ.  pp. 
113  &c.  134  &c.  140  ;  Letters  of  the 
Martyrs,  (Cranmer.)  pp.  19.20.  9,  and 
Ridley,  pp.  45,  49,  52,  74  -  77,  &c.  As 
taught  in  the  homilies,  see  Palmer, 
vol.  i.  pp.  306,  307.  See  also  pp.  317, 
310,  and  Powell,  p.  113;  Faber  on  Al- 
bigenses, pp.  25-27,  194,273,534- 
540 ;  and  as  to  all  the  reformed 
churches,  see  ibid,  p  160,  and  Brit. 
Ref.  vol.  i.  p.  133,  &c. ;   (Cobham)  p. 


127,  (The  Lollards)  pp.  129,  143,  &c. ; 
Burnet  on  39  Art.  p.  243,  where  see 
Davenant.     Bishop  Hall's  Wks. 

"At  the  lateanniversary  of  the  Brit- 
ish Reformation  Society,  the  Rev. 
E.  Bickersteth  expressed  his  perfect 
conviction,  that  popery  was  the  pre- 
dicted apostacy,  and  that  the  pope 
was  the  man  of  sin,  and  that  he  was 
no  churchman,  who  denied  that  the 
pope  was  the  antichrist  of  scripture." 
N.  Y.  Obs. 

6)  So  teaches  even  Palmer,  vol. 
i.  p.  64.  So  also  Dr.  Barrow  on  the 
Unity  of  the  Church,  Wks.  vol.  ii. 
p.  762. 

7)  See  Palmer,  vol.  i.  pp.  253, 
282,  298,  304. 

8)  Chillingworth,  Wks.  vol.  i. 
pp.  124,  137,  14G.  During  the  preva- 
lence of  Arianism  in  the  churcli,  as 
Hilary  and  Basil  say,  "the  orthodox 
were  hatched  under  the  wings  of  the 
Arian  priests." 

The  church  of  Rome  herself  ar- 
gues, that  idolatry  unchurches  any 
body  guilty  of  it.  Now,  according  to- 
the  belief  of  all  prntestant  Christen- 
dom, the  church  of  Rome,  so  far  forth 
as  she  has  acted  upon  the  doctrine  of 
transubstantiation,  praying  to  angels 
and  saints,  «fec.  has  been  guilty  of 
idolatry.     And  so  also  will  the  church 


206  THE    ROMISH   SUCCESSION    APOSTATE.  [lECT.    IX. 

But  transubstantialion,  which  is  one  of  the  worst  of  those 
errors,  was  established  by  the  fourth  lateran  synod,  in  1215, 
was  beheved  generally  by  the  scholastic  divines  —  and  enforced 
in  the  council  of  Constance.'  Purgatory,  and  the  infallibility  of 
the  pope,  were  also  enjoined  by  the  council  of  Florence,  and 
were,  long  before  the  council  of  Trent,  held  generally  as  re- 
ceived doctrines  within  the  Romish  church.* 

It  is  thus  made  clear,  that  the  Romish  hierarchy  has  been 
regarded  as  apostate  by  all  the  reformed  churches  ;  as  it  was 
also  by  the  Syrian  church  in  Malabar.^  Of  course,  the  prelatic 
succession,  being  exclusively  managed,  guided,  and  controlled, 
and  made  to  subserve  the  purposes,  and  to  meet  the  wishes,  of 
the  apostacy  ;  and  not  of  Christ's  true  church,  which  lay  enfolded 
within  that  apostacy,  must  partake  of  the  character  of  its  source, 
and  is,  therefore,  an  antichrislian  and  apostate  succession." 

Let  it  also  be  here  brought  to  view,  that  Christ's  true  flock, 
even  while  hunted  as  wild  beasts,  "  protested  (let  us  mark  it)  not 
so  much  against  the  papal  tyranny  as  against  the  very  practices 
and  opinions  which  the  Romish  church  had  inherited  entire  from 
the  Nicene  church."*  It  was  the  prelacy,  including  the  usurped 
dominion  of  the  prelates,  and  all  those  superstitious  doctrines 
whereby  they  exalted  their  supremacy  over  the  hearts  of  men 
—  as,  for  instance,  the  efficacious  virtue  of  the  sacraments  when 
episcopally  administered,  prayers  for  the  dead,  absolution,  pen- 
ance, asceticism,  virginity,  &c.  —  against  which  this  loud  remon- 
strance has  been  borne. 

Even,  then,  could  we  not  make  manifest  in  particulars,  as 
might,  nevertheless,  most  easily  be  done,  that  by  every  rule  and 
canon  of  judgment,  the  succession  from  the  apostles'  times  to  the 
reformation,  has  been,  in  numberless  ways,  rendered  invalid,  in- 

of  Rome  insist,  that  during  the  previa-  ed.,)    admits    this    consequence.     For 

lence  of    the    heresy    of    Arius,    the  after  quoting  the  strong  expressions  of 

church  was  idolatrous.     (See  Leslie's  the  Homily,   (Perils  of  Idol.   p.  Ill,) 

Letter  on  Episcop.  in  Scholar  Armed,  he   adds,  "  How  could   she   (i.e.   the 

vol.  i.  p.   72.)     It  follows,   therefore,  Romish   church.)    retain    this    divine 

that  the  line  of  the  prelatical  succes-  mission  and  jurisdiction  all  this  time, 

sion,  which  depends  for  its  personal  and  employ  them    in   commissioning 

continuity  upon   the   continuance  of  her  clergy  all   this  time,  (eight  hun- 

the  Romish   church,    as    a    true    and  dred  years,)  to  preach  up  this  detesta- 

sure  church,  must   necessarily  be  in-  ble  idolatry  .^"    He  argues  that  on  this 

validated.  ground  she  could  give  no  orders  in 

1)  See  Palmer,  vol.  ii.   pp.  222,  succession  at  all. 

224,  230.  5)  See  Anc't.  Christ,  vol.  i.  p. 4.53, 

2)  See  Palmer,  vol.  ii.  pp.  235,  and  Hough's  Vind.  as  above,  p.  70, 
244   245.  where,  among  other  things  in  which 

3)  See  Hough's  Vind.  of  Protest,  the  Syrian  church  differed  from  the 
Missions,  p.  70.  Roman  church,  is  the  fact  that  "she 

4)  Dr.  Milner,in  his  End  of  Con-  holds  two  orders,  the  priesthood  and 
troversy,  (letter  xxix.  p.  184,  Philad.  diaconate." 


LKCT.  IX.]     THE    ANGLICAN    AND    ROMISH    SUCCESSION    INVALID,  207 

formal,  uncanoiiical,  and  that  it  has  been  unchristian,  and  actu- 
ally voided  and  broken  ;  there  is  more  than  enough  in  this  gen- 
eral and  admitted  charge,  to  bring  into  utter  condemnation  the 
"  fundamental  axiom  "  of  prelacy, — her  message  and  commission 
from  heaven,  countersigned  and  attested  by  an  unbroken  succes- 
sion of  lineal  and  true  descendants  of  the  apostles,  with  gifts  and 
graces  from  on  high.' 

It  is  granted,  that  the  prelatic  Church  of  England  cannot  prove 
this  succession  without  going  back  to  the  church  of  Rome,  and 
connecting  her  present  succession  with  tliat  of  the  Romish  hier- 
archy.**  Indeed,  it  is  shown  by  Bishop  Godwin,  in  his  lives  of 
English  bishops,  that  a  large  proportion  of  them  were  ordained 
at  Rome,  and  by  Romish  prelates.^ 

It  is  also  granted  by  our  opponents,  that  a  church  might  be- 
come so  plainly  apostate,  as  to  lose  its  power  of  ordination.* 
Further,  it  is  allowed  that  Rome  is  heretical  now  and  has  hereby 
forfeited  her  orders*  —  having  bound  the  whole  Roman  com- 
munion in  the  council  of  Trent,  by  a  perpetual  bond  and  cove- 
nant, to  the  cause  of  antichrist.^ 

But  on  the  ground  assumed  by  the  strongest  advocates  of 
these  prelatic  claims,  to  wit,  that  the  Church  of  England  is  iden- 
tical with  the  church  as  it  existed  in  England  before  the  refor- 
mation—  she  being  unchanged  in  every  thing  except  her  civil 
relations  and  some  circumstantials  —  on  this  ground,  we  say,  the 
Romish  church  is  no  more  apostate  now  than  it  was  before  the 
reformation.''  For  at  that  time  the  Romish  and  the  Anglican 
churches,  as  far  as  England  was  concerned,  were  one  and  the 
same.  If,  then,  the  Romish  church  in  England  was  not  apos- 
tate then,  neither  is  that  church  apostate  now  —  but  if  the  Ro- 
mish church  is  apostate  now,  then  was  the  Anglican  church 
before  the  reformation  also  apostate.  Whatever  is  true  of  the 
Romish  church,  anterior  to  the  reformation,  is  also  true  of  the 
Anglican  church,  which  was  one  of  its  branches. 

But  the  Romish  church  inculcates  now  only  what  led  the 

1)  See  Lond.  Quarterly  Review,  thus  consecrated  ;   and  from  1119  to 
March,  1840.  pp.  272,  274.  1342,    1    find    twelve    archbishops   of 

2)  Oxf.  Tr.  vol.  i.  p  88.     Burnet  York  indebted  solely  to  Rome  for  all 
on  the  39th  Art.  p.  245.  the  gifts  they  conferred  on  others." 

3)  See    this  shown   at   large    in  4)  O.xford  Tracts,  vol.  i.  p.  95. 
Powell  on  Ap.  Succ.  sec.  xii.  p.  123.             5)  Ibid. 

"  Is  it  not  a  matter  of  indubitable  car-  6)  Ibid,  p.  96,  and  Wordsworth's 

tainty  that,  from  the  seventh  to  the  Eccl.  Biog..  vol.  iv.  p.  94. 
fifteenth  century,  the  archbishops  of  7)  Dr.  Hook's  Call  to  Union.  Dr. 

Canterbury  and  York,  as  well  as  seve-  Pusey's  Letter.      Dodsworth  on  Ro- 

ral  of  the  bishops,  were   in   general  inanism  and    Dissent.     Lond.  Quart 

consecrated  by  the  pope  or  his  legates.'  Rev.  Ap.  1839.     Oxf  Theol.     Palmer 

From  6G8  to  1414, 1  find  no  fewer  than  on  Ch.  &c. 
seventeen  archbishops  of  Canterbury 


208         THE    ROMISH    AND    ANGLICAN   STTCCESSION    INVALID,     [LECT.  IX. 

English  reformers,  with  all  the  reformed  churches,  and  the  true 
church  of  Jesus  Christ  in  every  past  age,  to  hrand  her  as  anti- 
christian,  heretical,  and  idolatrous.  The  Romish  hierarchy  had, 
therefore,  lost  the  privilege  of  ordination  as  well  before,  as  she 
has  since  the  reformation.  Her  orders,  as  these  very  writers 
insist,  when  arguing  with  her,  were  then  just  as  much  as  now, 
to  say  the  very  least,  of  a  doubtful  character.*  When  brought 
to  the  test,  either  of  scripture,  of  reason,  or  of  the  canon  law, 
they  are  and  were  most  demonstrably  unsound,  and  a  perfect 
nullity.'^  The  conclusion,  therefore,  is  inevitable.  The  orders 
of  the  English  prelatic  church,  being  derived  from  Rome,  are 
less  than  nothing  and  vanity.  Her  whole  unbroken  line  of  pre- 
latic succession,  idolized  as  it  is,  is  what  the  apostle  defines  other 
idols,  quite  as  rationally  worshipped  by  their  blinded  devotees, 
a  mere  nothing  in  the  world.  Even  in  the  fulness  of  its  boasted 
sufficiency,  it  is  in  straits ;  and  when  brought  to  the  test  of  his- 
torical investigation,  it  perishes  in  the  fire  of  probation,  and  is 
thus  shown  to  be  the  hay,  wood,  and  stubble,  which  cannot  endure 
the  breath  of  this  fiery  furnace. 

Seeing,  then,  that  this  prelaiical  succe?sion  is  identified  with 
that  of  the  papacy,  which  has  been  pronounced  apostate  and 
antichristian  by  the  universal  judgment  of  all  true  christians,  of 
every  age  and  of  every  country,  it  is  unnecessary  to  pursue  its 
investigation  with  any  minuteness  beyond  the  period  of  the  ref- 
ormation. Being,  as  we  have  seen,  united  up  to  that  time  with 
the  stream  of  the  papacy,  it  must  with  it  be  condemned.  And 
as  by  the  decision  of  the  true  catholic  and  universal  church,  this 
Romish  hierarchy  —  and  of  course  the  prelatical  or  papistical 
succession  —  has  been  declared  antichristian,  so  has  this  very 
hierarchy  utterly  repudiated  the  present  claims  of  the  Anglican 
prelacy  to  a  true  and  valid  succession.  The  existing  orders  of 
the  English  church  are  declared  to  be  null  and  void,  and  without 
any  foundation  whatever,  by  that  very  power  to  whom  she  has 
subjected  her  character  and  claims,  as  a  true  church  of  Jesus 
Christ  —  and  whom  her  divines  are  now  courting  as  their  dear 
sister,  and  reverencing  as  their  honored  mother.^ 

But  even  should  we  assume,  as  authenticated  and  genuine,  the 
uninterrupted  line  of  the  Anglican  succession,  from  the  time  of 
the  apostles  to  the  period  of  the  reformation — and  commence 
our  examination  of  it  with  the  reformed  dynasty  —  there  is  as 
little  ground  for  any  rational  faith  in  its  unfounded  assumptions. 

1)  Palmer  on  Ch.,  vol.  ii.  part  vi.  3)  See  Palmer  on  the  Ch.,  vol.  ii. 
and  vii.                                                          part  ii. 

2)  See  Powell,  sect.  xi. 


LECT.  IX.]       THK    ANlJLli  .AN    S)t;COUsSU)\    WITHOUT    HEUINMNG.  209 

The  present  succession  of  the  Anglican  church  was  vitiated 
at  its  very  fountain.  Like  that  of  Rome,  it  wants  a  begin- 
ning, or  one  duly  and  properly  substantiated.  Unless  there 
has  been  imparted  to  this  hierarchy  a  new  implantation  of  the 
plenitudo  sumnii  sacedotii,  by  which  "  supreme  power  she  can 
supply  the  deficiencies  of  dubious  ordinations,'"  and  can  "  ani- 
mate a  dead  form  with  the  inward  grace  of  the  divine  commis- 
sion;"* and  "remove  all  the  impediments  which  prevent  that 
grace  from  descending  :"^  unless  she  can  give  miraculous  evi- 
dence of  such  an  immediate,  and  divine  appointment  and  inves- 
titure —  then  is  she  assuredly  despoiled  of  her  principality  and 
power,  and  her  all-necessary  succession  hopelessly  destroy- 
ed. For  a  valid  consecration  can  be  conferred  only  by  those 
whose  capacity  to  administer  it  is  ''  in  no  degree  doubt- 
ful"*—  "and  since  this  divine  grace  or  commission  is  only 
given  to  those  who  are  thus  lawfully  ordained,  and  when  (thus) 
actually  ordained  ;"*  and  "  no  such  doubtful  ordinations  could 
be  cured  by  their  now  combining,  in  numbers,  to  remedy  the 
defect,  so  that  ten  or  twenty  bishops,  themselves  invalidly  or- 
dained, could  not  confer  a  valid  ordination"*  —  the  prelatic 
Church  of  England  has  not  now,  and  never  can  restore  within 
herself,  a  true  and  valid  succession. 

The  history  of  the  present  Church  of  England,  as  established 
at  the  reformation,  renders  all  pretensions  to  a  divine  right,  or 
an  apostolical  descent  for  the  order  of  her  prelates,  supremely 
ridiculous. 

"  I  allude,"  to  use  the  words  of  Dr.  Mitchell,''  "to  the  king's 
compelling  all  the  bishops  within  his  realm,  to  take  out  commis- 
sions from  him,  by  which  they  acknowledged,  that  all  jurisdiction, 
civil  and  ecclesiastical,  flowed  from  the  king,  and  that  they 
exercised  it,  only  at  the  king's  courtesy  ;  and  that  as  they  had 
it  of  his  bounty,  so  they  would  be  ready  to  deliver  it  up  at  his 
pleasure;  and  therefore  the  king  did  empower  them  to  ordain, 
give  institution,  and  do  all  the  other  parts  of  the  episcopal  func- 
tion." "  Thus,"  as  our  author  remarks,  "  were  they  made,"  not 
Christ's  bishops,  but  "  the  kind's  ministers"  or  lieutenants.  Does 
not  this  proceeding  of  Henry,  taken  in  connexion  with  your 
scheme,  present  to  us  a  curious  contemplation?  —  a  divine  right 
established  by  human  laws;  and  successors  of  the  apostles,  not 
merely  nominated  by  a  lay  sovereign,  but  comini'^sioned  to  act 
in  his  stead,  as  his  deputies  or  delegates,  and   removable  from 

1)  Palmer,  vol.  ii.  p.  474.  5)  Ibid,  p.  441. 

2)  Ibid,  p.  431.  6)  Ibid,  p.  473. 

3)  Ibid.  7)  Presb.  Letters,  pp.  274,  275, 

4)  Palmer,  v«l.  ii.  p.  486.  276,  279,  250.     Se«  als*  pp.  2^6,  8^6. 

27 


210  THE    ANGLICAN    SUCCESSION    A    REGAL    ONE.  [LECT.    IX. 

their  office,  as  deputies  ordinarily  are,  at  his  pleasure?  'But 
Henry  iiad  no  riglit  to  the  authority  he  assumed.'  No  matter, 
he  exercised  it ;  and  you  derive  your  orders  from  bishops,  whom 
he  empowered  to  ordain,  give  institution,  and  do  all  the  other 
parts  of  the  episcopal  function,  in  his  name,  and  in  his  stead  ; 
irom  bishops,  who  had  no  authority,  temporal  or  spiritual,  but  what 
King  Henry  gave  them." "  Thus  it  happens,  for  the  ever- 
lasting honor  and  consolation  of  all  high-churchmen  in  this  island, 
that  Henry  VUI.  and  his  delegates  or  lieutenants  in  the  episcopal 
office,  stand  in  the  line  of  succession  between  you  and  the 
apostles  ;  and  then  unless  you  will  all  be  re-ordained  by  the  pope, 
or  some  patriarch  of  a  Greek,  Asiatic,  or  African  church,  or  by 
the  moderator  of  our  general  assembly,  who  would  do  it  as  well 
as  any  of  them,  Henry  VIH.  and  his  ecclesiastical  lieutenants 
will  stand  to  the  end  of  the  world,  though  your  flocks  should  all 
go  to  perdition,  because  their  bishops  and  priests  are  '  intruders 
and  usurpers;'  —  a  mortifying  truth  to  men,  whose  pretensions 
are  so  high.  But  who  can  make  that  straight,  which  has,  in  the 
course  of  providence,  been  long  crooked?" 

"  On  this  footing,"  says  Mr.  Anderson,  "  was  prelacy  settled, 
even  in  England,  at  the  reformation  ;  and  1  challenge  any  man 
to  produce  documents,  where,  even  to  this  day,  they  have  bet- 
tered its  foundation,  or  settled  it  upon  scri))ture  authority,  or 
divine  institution."  I  am  not  aware,  that  any  person  has  accepted 
this  challenge.^ 

The  ordination  of  Archbishop  Parker,  the  trunk  of  their  present 
succession,  was  confessedly  "disorderly,'"^  and  "  a  violent  proceed- 
ing ;"^  and  "  carried  on  amid  human  sin,"  and  a  "scandal,"  and  an 
"  error."  —  It  was,  as  many  insist,  and  as  the  Romish  church 
affirms,  altogether  a  nullity,  and  in  contradiction  to  all  law. 
Now  it  is  a  poor  excuse  for  this  grievous  sin  to  inform  us,  as 
Mr.  Newman  does,  that  "  similar  scandals"  mark  the  entire 
chain  of  this  prelatical  succession  up  to  the  earliest  age,  so  that 
"  in  truth  the  whole  course  of  Christianity  from  the  first,  when  we 
come  to  examine  it,  is  but  one  series,"  as  he  allows,  of  such 
"troubles  and  disorders."*  All  the  waters  of  a  flood  will  not 
wash  out  "this  especial  stain,  which  is  imputed  to  the  Anglican 

])  "  The  regal  supremacy  was  2)  Lect.  on  Romanism,  pp.   424 
the  leading  principle  of  the  reforma-  and  429. 
tion,  and  hath  been  lately  styled  (by  3)  Ibid,  p.  417. 
the  bisliop  of  L.  and   C,  Charge,  p.             4)  See  Newman  on   Romanism, 
41.)    the    groundwork  of    it."        Sir  pp.  417  and  424,  wlio  breaks  the  force 
Michael    Foster,    Knt.  Exam,   of  tlie  of  the  Romish  objection  by  showing 
Scheme  of  Church  Power.    This  fact  that  "  similar    scandals  "   were    corn- 
Sir  Michael  Foster,  in  the  above  work,  mon  in  the  Romish  succession,  up  to 
demonstrates  by  a  multitude  of  facts,  the  earliest  ages.     See  pp.  418,  430. 
whose  force  cannot  be  resitted.     See 
putiffi. 


LECT.  IX.]  Parker's  consecration  invalid.  211 

church"  when  "  a  new  succession  was  introduced'"  —  not  by  the 
authority  of  Heaven,  but  by  the  plenipotentiary  authority  of  a 
woman,  (Queen  Ehzabeth,)  who,  althoui;h  forbidden  by  express 
writ  of  Heaven  to  rule  in  the  church  at  all,  but  rather  commanded 
to  be  in  subjection,  was  made  by  th.e  traitorous  conduct  of  these 
same  prelates,  arbitress  of  the  truth,  and  sovereign  lord,  as  well 
of  the  souls  and  consciences,  as  of  the  lives  and  floods  of  the 
people.''  Then  it  was  that  Christendom  beheld  the  spectacle, 
never  before  witnessed  in  the  darkest  times  of  Romish  despotism, 
*' tbe  cruel  and  ridiculous  usurpation  of  purely  spiritual  authority 
by  tbe  kings  and  queens  of  England."^ 

The  facts  relating  to  the  consecration  of  Archbishop  Parker, 
demand  our  special  consideration.  These  show  incontrovertibly, 
that  the  very  fountain  of  that  modern  succession,  from  which 
the  Anglican  church  derives  all  its  pretended  virtue,  is  fatally 
poisoned.  The  existing  succession  of  that  church  can  rise  no 
higlier  than  its  source,  either  as  to  antiquity  or  validity  ;  and  is 
therefore  recent  in  its  origin,  and  doubtful  in  its  character.  For 
when  Elizabeth  came  to  the  throne,  and  the  reformation  of  the 
church  was  again  commenced,  all  the  bishops  in  the  kingdom, 
except  Kitchen  of  Landaff,  refused  to  comply.*  It  was  there- 
fore impossible  to  derive  any  canonical  or  valid  succession  from 
the  ancient  British  line,  since  three  are  necessary  to  convey  such 
succession. 

The  whole  chain  of  the  present  Anglican  succession  hangs, 
then,  upon  the  validity  of  Archbishop  Parker's  consecration. 
Now  he  was  ordained  by  not  a  single  prelate  of  the  ancient  Brit- 
ish line ;  but  by  four  English  bishops,  who  had  been  consecrated 
in  the  reign  of  Edward,  and  who  were  afterwards  deposed  in 
the  reign  of  Queen  Mary,  by  that  very  church,  on  whose  author- 
ty  the  succession  depends, — and  had  never  been  restored  ; — that 
is  to  say.  Barlow,  Scory,  Coverdale,  and  Hodgkins.  Kitchen, 
the  only  remnant  of  the  ancient  British  line,  though  appointed  to 
do  so,  yet  did  not  in  fact,  assist  at  the  consecration  of  Parker. 

On  this  subject  Mr.  Jared  Sparks  thus  writes  :* 

"  Again,  the  validity  of  Archbishop  Parker's  consecration,  in 
the  time  of  Queen  Elizabeth,  is  well  known  to  be,  at  least,  very 
questionable;  yet  this  is  the  origin  of  the  present  English  succes- 
sion. Edward  the  Sixth  abolislied  the  Romish  form  of  ordina- 
tion, and  substituted  a  new  one  in  its  place,  which  is  still  retained 
in  the  church.  The  old  form  was  restored  by  Queen  Mary,  but 
rejected  again  by  Elizabeth,  and  that  of  Edward  adopted.    When 

1)  Lect.  on  Romanism,  p.  417.  5)  See  Letters  on   Min.  Rit.  and 

2)  Spiritual  Despotism,  p.  357.  Doct  of  Prot.  Epii.  Ch.  Bait,  ld20,  p. 

3)  Ibid.  See  all  eec.  viii.  3?. 

4)  Buraet  UiCt  of  Refx 


212  Parker's  consecration  invalid.  [lect.  ix. 

Parker  was  nominated  to  be  archbishop  of  Canterbury,  in  1559, 
she  issued  a  commission  to  certain  bishops  to  perforin  the  cere- 
mony of  consecration,  accordinj^  to  the  prescribed  form.  Some 
of  them  refused  to  comply,  alleging  that  such  a  consecration  would 
not  be  valid.  She  issued  another  commission  to  such  persons, 
as  she  knew  would  not  refuse,  but  whose  episcopal  authority  was 
much  to  be  doubted.  The  catholics  immediately  disputed  this 
consecration,  and  have  almost  universally  denied  its  validity. 
They  profess  to  have  proved,  that  Barlow,  the  consecrating 
bishop,  was  never  himself  consecrated.  They  say,  that  no 
record  of  this  transaction  was  found  or  cited,  till  more  than  fifty 
years  afterward,  when  the  Lambeth  Register  was  first  quoted. 
And  even  this  register  entirely  destroys  the  validity  of  tlie  conse- 
cration, by  showing  it  to  iiave  been  performed  according  to  King 
Edward's  ordinal,  which  was  not  consistent  with  any  former  usage 
of  the  church. 

"  I  shall  not  pretend  to  decide  on  these  objections  of  the  catho- 
lics ;  but  if  well  founded,  they  must  prove  the  invalidity  of 
Parker's  consecration,  and  the  weakness  of  all  pretensions  in  the 
Church  of  England  to  a  divine  succession. 

"To  my  mind  these  objections,  and  others,  briefly  and  clearly 
stated  in  the  memoir  of  the  Abbe  Renandot,  are  convincing. 
Some  of  them  are  partially  removed  in  Courayer's  elaborate  an- 
swer, but  he  has  by  no  means  cleared  the  subject  of  difficulties."! 

1)  "  The  persons  who  consecrat-  "  Parker  being  in  this  way  raised  to 

ed  Parker,"  says  Dr.  Rice,  (Evangel,  the  see  of  Canterbury,  proceeded  to 

Mag.  vol.  X.  pp.  38,39.)  "were  not  bish-  consecrate   fourteen  bishops  in  place 

ops  at  the  time  of  performing  the  ser-  of  those   who   iiad   been   deprived  by 

vice.  The  persons  who  performed  this  Queen  Elizabeth,  as  supreme  head  of 

office,  were  Barlow  and  Scory,  bish-  the  church.     Here,  then,  we  see  that 

ops   elect  of  Chichester  and  Hereford,  almost  all   the    bishops    of  England, 

C'oz3er</rtZc,  a  deprived  bishop  of  Exeter,  though  canonically  consecrated,  were 

and  Hodgkins,  suffragan    of  Bedford,  displaced  by  the  civil  power,  and  oth- 

On  this  subject  it  has  been  remarked,  ers  put  in  their  stead,  by  a  single  bish- 

that '  Elizabeth  deprived    the  bishops  op,  whose    consecration    is   seriously 

whom  she  found   in  the  church,  and  questioned."  ..'•  That  difficulties  were 

the  episcopal  character  censed.'  In  like  felt  in  relation  to  Archbishop  Parker, 

manner  had  the  episcopal  character  de-  is  evident  from  this  fact;  that  seven 

parted  from  the  bishops  wiioni  Mary  or  eight  years  after  his  consecration, 

deposed.     For  if  it  was  right  in  Eli/-  this  wliole  matter  was  broiiirht  before 

abeth  to  put  down  bishops,   and  take  parliament,    and   an    act    was    passed 

from    them  their  episcopal  character  confirming  its  validity,  and  that  of  the 

and  rights,  it  would   not  be  wrong  in  consecrations     performed      by     liim. 

Mary  to  do  precisely  the  same  thing.  There  must  have  been  important  rea- 

Was  not  Mary  as  much  the  sovereign  sons  for  this,  or  such   a  body   as  the 

of  Engl-uid  as  Elizabeth.'     If  the  lat-  British  parliament  would  hardly  have 

ter  could  deprive  bishops,  so  could  the  adopted  this  measure.     This  was  done 

former;  and   if  Mary  could  deprive,  about  IfjlU!  or  l")!;?." 

what  becomes  of  Parker's   consecra-  "  A^ain,"  (Pres   Letters,  p.  317)  "  it 

tion,  the  root  of  all  episcopacy  in  Eng-  is  well   known  that   Patki'r,  the  first 

land.'"  protestant  archbishop  of  Canterbury, 


LECT.    IX.]       OTHER    FLAWS    IN    THE   ANGLICAN    SUCCESSION. 


213 


There  are  various  other  grounds  on  which,  arguing  on  prelatical 
principles,  this  succession  can  be  shown  to  be  at  least  probably 
invalid  and  defunct.  Thus  in  the  period  between  1553 — 1558, 
the  visible  church  in  England  was  destroyed,  because  it  was 
again  united  to  the  Romish  church,  then  under  the  control  of  the 
tridentine  council,  which  was  organized  in  1545,  when  it  began 
to  promulge  its  sentiments  until,  in  1563,  they  were  finally 
settled  and  formally  decreed.  At  this  time,  therefore,  the  Romish 
church,  as  is  allowed  on  all  hands,  had  become  utterly  apostate 
from  Christ.  Was  not,  then,  the  regular  succession  of  the 
external  visible  church,  at  this  time,  interrupted  ?  By  what 
authority,  did  the  clergy,  after  Mary's  death,  "assume  and 
invent  an  ordination,"^  and  organize  the  church  ?  Here,  then,  is 
an  evident  flaw  in  this  prelatical  chain. 

Again,  if  only  prelatic  ordination  can  validly  consecrate  any 
individual  to  the  office  of  a  presbyter,^  then,  of  course,  he  who  is 
not  thus  consecrated  a  presbyter,  cannot  be  qualified  for  receiv- 
ing prelatic  orders.''     Now,  although  Mr.  Keble  affirms  that  it 


in  the  reign  of  Elizabeth,  whether  he 
was  consecrated  in  the  Naa's  Head 
tavern  or  not,  was  consecrated  some 
where  by  four  bishops  who  had  no 
dioceses  at  the  time. 

"This  also  is  a  case  in  point ;  for  Par- 
ker, like  your  cotleo-e  bishops,  was  or- 
dained to  no  particular  or  local  charge, 
and  his  ordainers  had  not  only  been 
deprived,  but  were  designated  to  no 
dioceses.'" 

In  a  work  printed  at  Oxford  in 
the  year  1G87,  entitled  "  Church  Gov- 
ernment, part  V.  a  Relation  of  the 
Eiglish  Reformation,"  chapter  xii. 
&c.  are  devoted  to  an  illuslration  of 
the  canonical  delects  of  King  VA- 
ward's  and  Queen  Elizabeth's  new 
bishops." 

"  Instead  of  the  catholic  bishopsex- 
pelled.  being  all  that  then  sate,  save 
only  Anthony,  bishop  of  Landaff, 
(whom  Camden  calls  the  calamity  of 
his  see,  «X:c  )  the  queen  had  only  six 
others  surviving  since  Kin<r  Kdward's 
time,  out  of  whom  to  raise  her  new  ec- 
clesiastical hierarchy.  Scory,  bislmp 
of  Chichrster,  Coverdale  of  Exeter, 
Birlow  of  Bath,  two  suffragan  bish- 
ops of  Bedford  and  Thetford.  and  one 
bishop  of  Ossory  in  Ireland  ;  and  of 
whom  but  one  was  consecrated  in 
Henrv  VIII  "s  days  ;  the  other  five  in 
King  Edward's,  whose  times  were  full 
of  uncanonical  proceedincrs,  and  liable 
to  several  exceptions.     Again,  two  of 


which  bishops.  Scory  and  Coverdale, 
in  King  Edward's  time,  came  (as  is 
said)  into  bishoprics  nr)t  void.  Be- 
sides that  they,  as  also  Barlow,  were 
lawfully  ejected  in  Queen  Mary's 
days."     (p.   218.) 

"  The  queen  in  her  mandate  to  Cov- 
erdale, Scory.  &-C  ,  for  the  ordination 
of  her  new  archbishop,  Parker. «&c.  was 
glad,  out  of  her  spiritual  supremacy 
and  universal  jurisdiction,  to  dispense 
and  srive  them  leave  to  dispense  to 
themselves  with  all  former  church 
laws  wiiich  should  be  transgressed,  in 
elfcting.  consecrating,  and  investing 
the  bishop."  (He  then  quntes  the 
words  of  her  letters-patent.) 

"  To  meet  the  continued  scruples  on 
this  score,  an  act  was  passed,  (6  Eliz. 
1.  c)  and  the  answer  here  jriven  to 
such  scrupulous  minds,  seems  in  ef- 
fect this;  "  that  though  these  bishops 
were  ordained  contrary  to  the  laws  of 
the  church,  yet  they  were  ordained 
accorditig  to  the  laws  of  the  land,  and 
that  this  was  sufficient  to  warrant  the 
ordination,  because  these  laws  had  giv- 
en authority  to  the  queen  to  dispense 
with  anv  repusrnant  laws  of  the 
church.  ■"    (pp.  2-26,  227  ) 

1)  Spiritual  Despot,  p.  357. 

2)  See  all  sect.  i. 

3)  See  also  in  ibid,  at  p.  211,  and 

Oxf  Tr.  vol  i  pp  p.^,  nn,  ni,  isg. 

4)  Oxf  Tr.  vol.  i.  p.  90. 


214  ANGLICAN    PRELATES    ONLY    PRESBYTERS.  [LECT.  IX. 

will  "not  be  averred,  by  any  one,  tiiat  ever  the  office  of  bish- 
op was  allowed  to  be  exercised  on  such  an  ordination,"^  we  can 
only  wonder,  with  what  presumption  he  does  so.  For  it  is 
notorious,  that  Hume  and  Baxter  were  both  solicited  to  fill 
sees. 

"  Since  the  reformation,  the  English  bishops  have  consecrat- 
ed not  a  few,  who  before  had  received  only  presbyterian  ordi- 
nation.    Such  was  the  case  with  the  Scottish  bishops  in  1(310."'* 

"One  will,  perhaps,  be  surprised  to  hear,"  says  Dr.  Camp- 
bell,' "that  our  Scotch  episcopal  party,  who  have  lonii;  affect- 
ed to  value  themselves  on  the  regular  transmission  of  their  or- 
ders, have  none  but  what  they  derive  from  bishops,  merely 
nominal." 

"  Even  their  own  writers  acknowledn;e  that,  immediately  after 
the  death  of  Dr.  Ross,  bishop  of  Edinburgh,  the  last  of  those 
ordained  before  the  revolution,  there  were  no  local  bishops  in 
Scotland,  not  one  appointed  to  any  diocese,  or  having  the  in- 
spection of  any  people,  or  spiritual  jurisdiction  over  any  dis- 
trict. But  there  were  bishops  who  had  been  ordained  at  large  ; 
some  by  Bishop  Ross,  others  by  some  of  the  Scotch  bishops, 
who,  after  the  revolution,  had  retired  to  England.  The  warm- 
est partisans  of  tint  sect  liave  not  scrupled  to  own,  that,  at  that 
gentleman's  decease,  all  the  dioceses  in  Scotland  were  become 
vacant,  and  even  to  denominate  those  who  had  been  ordained 
in  the  manner  above  mentioned,  Utopian  bishops:  —  a  title  not 
differing  materially  from  that  1  have  given  litem,  merely  nominal 
bishops.  For,  as  far  as  I  can  learn,  they  were  not  titular,  even 
in  the  lowest  sense.  No  axiom  in  philosophy  is  more  indisput- 
able, than  that  quid  nuU'ibi  est,  non  est.  The  ordination, 
therefore,  of  our  present  Scotch  episcopal  clergy,  is  solely 
from  -presbyters ;  for  it  is  allowed,  that  those  men,  who  came 
under  the  hands  of  Bishop  Ross,  had  been  regularly  admitted 
ministers  or  presbyters,  in  particular  congregations,  before  the 
revolution.  And,  to  that  first  ordination,  I  maintain  that  their 
farcical  consecration  by  Dr.  Ross,  and  others,  when  they  were 
solemnly  made  the  depositaries  of  no  deposit,  commanded  to  be 
diligent  in  doing  no  work,  vigilant  in  the  oversight  of  no  flock, 
assiduous  in  teaching  and  governing  no  people,  and  presiding  in 
no  church,  added  nothing  at  all.    Let  no  true  son  of  our  church 

1)  Primit.  Trad.  p.  Ifi2.   Dr.  Hnw  p.  127.)  See  this  assertion  further  dis- 

also  as.=!Prts  that  thp  Cliiirch  of  Eng-  proved  in  lect.  xvi. 
land  "  has  never  suffered  any  |)erson3  2)  Presb.  Del',  p.  69. 

without  such  ordination  to  officinte  as  3)  Lect.  on  Eccl.  Hist.  lect.  xi. 

clergymen  within  her  limits,   (Vind.  p.  202. 


LECT.  IX.]        ANGLICAN    PRELATES    NOT    EVEN    PRESBYTERS.  216 

be  offended,  that  I  acknowledge  our  non-jurors  to  have  a  sort 
of  presbyterian  ordination;  for  1  would  by  no  means  be  under- 
stood as  equalizing  theirs,  to  that  which  obtains  with  us.  Who- 
ever is  ordained  amongst  us,  is  ordained  a  bishop  by  a  class  of 
bishops.  It  is  true,  we  neither  assume  the  titles,  nor  enjoy 
the  revenues,  of  the  dignified  clergy,  so  denominated  in  other 
countries  ;  but  we  are  not  the  less  bishops,  in  every  thing  es- 
sential, for  being  more  conformable  to  the  apostolical  and  primi- 
tive model,  when  every  bishop  had  but  one  parish,  one  congre- 
gation, one  church  or  place  of  common  worship,  one  ahar  or 
communion  table,  and  was,  perhaps,  as  poor  as  any  of  us. 
Whereas  the  ordination  of  our  non-jurors  proceeds  from  pres- 
byters in  their  own  (that  is,  in  the  worst)  sense  of  the  word  ; 
men,  to  whom  a  part  only  of  the  ministerial  powers  was  com- 
mitted, and  from  whom,  particularly,  was  withheld  the  right  of 
transmitting  orders  to  others." 

"  It  signifies  little,"  adds  Dr.  Mitchell,^  "  that  Spotiswood, 
Hamilton,  and  Lamb,  were  not  episcopally  ordained  deacons  and 
presbyters  before  their  consecration.  As  they  were  not  chris- 
tians, it  would  have  been  of  no  consequence,  although  they  had 
been  re-ordained  presbyters  and  deacons  a  thousand  times."  .  .  . 
"  In   consequence   of   the   king's    senseless   delicacy,   and   the 

*  modern  liberality  '  of  his  English  bishops,  you  must  either  be 
silent,  or  acknowledge  that  your  own  professed  principles  are 
utterly  subversive  of  the  lofty  claims  which  you  advance,  when 
we  tell  you,  that  you  derive  your  orders  from  men,  to  the  va- 
lidity of  whose  baptism  you  yourselves  object;  and  who  arriv- 
ed at  the  episcopate  per  saltum,  leaping  all  at  once,  without 
baptism,  and  without  ordination,  from   paganism   into   episcopal 

thrones." "The  breach  in  your  succession,  occasioned 

by  the  consecration  of  three  presbyterian  ministers,  who  had 
been  neither  episcopally  baptized,  nor  episcopally  ordained,  is 
too  manifest  to  be  concealed  or  disguised,  and  too  well  authenti- 
cated to  be  called  in  question.  And  here,  let  me  ask,  by  the 
way,  whether  all  the  episcopals  in  Scotland,  for  half  a  century, 
were  sent  to  perdition,  merely  because  James  VI,  and  his  bish- 
ops, with  the  exception  of  the  excellent  Bishop  Andrews,  were 
ignorant  of  the  necessity  of  re-baptizing  and  re-ordaining  Spot- 
iswood, Hamilton,  and  Lamb,  or  had  too  much  idle  delicacy,  or 

*  modern  liberality'  to  insist  upon   it?" "Of  all    the 

bishops  in  Scotland,  who  were  consecrated  before  the  civil  wars, 
and  the  triumph  of  the  covenant,  there  was  only  Syderf  to  be 
found  in  1661,  when  the  restoration  of  episcopacy  was  resolved 

1)   Presb.  Letters,  addressed  to  Bishop  Skinner,  pp.  299,  300,  302,  306. 


216  ANGLICAN    PRELATES    NOT    EVEN    PRESBYTERS.       [lECT.    IX. 

on." "  When  the  new-made  bishops  came  down  to  this 

country,  they  consecrated  six  covenanters,  without  subjecting 
them  to  the  new  birth,  which  Leighton  and  Sharp  had  been 
obhged  to  submit  to.  As  for  re-baptizing  those  covenanters, 
the  necessity  of  that  operation  to  the  salvation  of  ilie  clergy, 
and  all  under  their  charge,  was  not  known  in  Scotland  till  after 
the  revolution  :  at  any  rate,  nobody  chose  to  incur  the  nick- 
name of  the  Deucalion  of  the  world,  by  re-baptizing  heretics 
and  schismatics.  Hence  Sharp  and  Leighton,  as  well  as  the  six 
bishops,  whom  they  and  their  colleagues  consecrated,  soon  after 
their  return  from  LiOndon,  were  nothing  but  presbyterian  chris- 
tians, otherwise  pagans,  as  your  ecclesiastical  dictionary  has  it, 
to  the  day  of  their  death." 

But  there  is  another  test,  by  which  the  rottenness  of  the 
pre-ent  succession  of  the  English  hierarchy  may  be  exposed. 
it  is  laid  down  by  Mr.  Palmer,  as  an  undoubted  judgment  of 
the  church  universal,  that  separation  from  the  one,  catholic,  and 
apostolic  church,  to  which  belongs  the  succession  of  episcopal 
grace,  is  incapable  of  justification;'  —  and  that  any  society  of 
men,  calling  themselves  christians,  which  have  thus  voluntarily 
separated,  can  form  no  part  of  the  church  of  Christ.  With  such 
a  body  it  is  unlawful  to  hold  communion.^  Such  separation  is  a 
sin  of  the  deepest  dye^ — and  entirely  "  cuts  off  from  christian 
unity,  and  fiom  the  true  church  of  Christ,"*  those  guilty  of  it. 

Therefore  do  we  find  these  men  repudiating  the  name  of 
protpsiant,  as  an  unholy  and  an  odious  thing,"  lamenting  it.  as 
their  "  infelicity,  that  they  are  compelled  to  be  protestant"*  — 
and  u^lorying  in  the  fact,  that  ever  since  the  period  of  the  refor- 
mation,   these  prelatic  pretensions,  assumptions,   and   supersti- 

1)  Palmer,  vol.  i.  part  1,  ch.  iv.  than  wliat  they  believe, — if  the  re- 
sect, ii.  ligion  it  generates  mainly  consists  in 

2)  Ibid,  p.  69.  a  mere  attack   upi)n  Rome,  and  tends 

3)  Ibid,  pp.  70,  123.  to  be  a  mere  instrument  of  state  pur- 

4)  ibid,  p.  402.  poses.  —  if  it  tends  to  swallow  up  de- 

5)  Froude's  Remains,  vol.  i.  p.  votion  in  worldliness,  and  the  church 
322.  in  the   executive,  —  if  it  damps,  dis- 

6)  Dodsworth  on  Dissl.  Preface,  couraores,  stifles  that  ancient  catholic 
The  following  is  from  Mr.  Newman's  system,  which,  if  true  in  the  be-in- 
Letter  to  Dr.  Faussett,  p.  2S.  "If  ning,  is  true  at  all  times,  —  and  if,  on 
persons,"  says  he,  "  aware  that  names  the  other  hand,  there  be  nothing  in 
are  things,  conscientiously  think  that  our  formularies  obliging  us  to  profess 
the  name  of  protestantism  is  produc-  it,  —  and  if  external  circumstances 
live  of  serious  mischief, —  ifitbetiie  have  so  changed,  that  what  it  was 
property  of  heresy  and  schism,  as  inexpedient  or  impossible  to  do  for- 
much  as  of  orthodoxy,  —  if  it  be  but  a  merly  is  both  possible  and  most  expe- 
negalive  word,  such  as  almost  forces  dient  now,  —  these  considerations,  I 
on  its  professors  the  idea  of  vague  in-  conceive,  may  form  a  reason  for  aban- 
defmite  creeds,  makes  them  turn  their  doning  the  word."  Letter  to  Dr.  Faua- 
thoughts    to    how    much   they    may  sett,  p.  28. 

doubt,  deny,  ridicule,  or  resist,  rather 


LECT.  XI.]         THE    ANGLICAN    SUCCESSION A    SECESSION.  217 

tions,  have  been  branded  as  popish,  and  as  the  unwashed  mark 
of  the  beast. 1 

Now,  when  we  turn  from  this  canon,  as  thus  laid  down  by 
prelatists  themselves,  to  the  historical  facts  in  the  case,  and 
which  are  not  to  be  squared  down  to  any  preconceived  opin- 
ions or  theories  —  we  find  nothing  more  plain,  than  the  certain 
separation  of  the  English  from  the  Romish  church.  The 
changes  to  which  the  reformation  led ;  —  the  new  powers  assum- 
ed by  the  Anglican  church  ;  —  and  its  entire  re-organization,  as 
effected  by  the  royal  supremacy,  and  parliamentary  legislation ;  — 
and  the  abundant  confessions  of  the  most  competent  and  impar- 
tial witnesses  ;  all  demonstrate  the  fact  that  the  Anglican  church 
did  separate  from  the  Romish,  and  did  thus,  on  prelatic  princi- 
ples, cut  herself  off  from  christian  unity,  from  the  church  of 
Christ,  and  from  all  pretensions  to  an  unbroken  succession  of 
lineal  descendants  from  the  apostles.2  "  Mr.  Gilpin,"  says  Dr. 
Wordsworth,  in  his  life  of  that  divine,  "  would  often  say,  that 
the  churches  of  the  protestants  were  not  able  to  give  any  firm 
and  solid  reason  for  their  separation,  besides  this,  to  wit : 
that  the  pope  is  antichrist.'" 

The  fact  of  such  a  separation  is  notorious.  It  constituted 
the  boast  and  glory  of  the  reformers,  and  it  is  the  acknowledged 
characteristic  of  that  spiritual  revolution.^  If,  therefore,  this 
doctrine  of  succession  is  true,  then  does  it  inevitably  follow  that 
the  Church  of  England  —  having  voluntarily  severed  her  former 
connexion  with  the  catholic  church  —  has  forever  abandoned 
all  rightful  claim  to  the  character  and  privileges  of  that  heavenly 
body. 

1)  "  This  ealumny,"  (of  popery,)  of  both  parties  against  the  greatest 

eays  Nelson,   in  his   Life  of  Bishop  and  best  of  our  divines,  as  often  as 

Bull,  (Burton's  edit.   vol.  i.  p.  311,)  they  have  stood  forward  to  maintain 

"  hath  been  thrown  upon  the  greatest  against  Romanism  on  one  hand,  and 

lights  of  our  church,  and  will  be  the  puritanism  on  the  other,  the   rights, 

fate  of  many  more,  who  shall  zealous-  ceremonies,  or  doctrines  of  the  catho- 

ly  contend  for  the  primitive  doctrines  lie  church   of  England.     It  was  the 

and   discipline   of  Christianity.     But  cry  against  Jewell,  Whitgift,  Hooker, 

yet,  in  the  day  of  any  trial,  the  men  Bramhall,  Andrews,  Hall,  Laud,  Mon- 

of  this  character  will  be  found  the  tagu,  Cosin,  Wren,  Taylor,  Sherlock, 

best  defenders  of  the  Church  of  Eng-  Bancroft,  Kettleworth,  Hickes,  Brett, 

land,    and     the     boldest    champions  Dodwell,  Leslie,  Ken,  and  Butler." 
against  the  corruptions  of  the  church  2)  The  evidence  on  this  subject 

of  Rome."  we  will  throw  into  Note  4. 

"  Our  reformation  was  called  popish  3)  Eccles.  Biog.  vol.  iv.  p.  94. 

by  Geneva,  (Lond.  Quart.  Rev.  Oxf  4)  That  the  Church  of  England 

Theol.  Ap.  1840  ;)  our  church  popish  did  actually  separate  from  the  Romish 

by  Calvin  and  Beza,  and  the  puritans  church,  at  the  period  of  the  reforma- 

in  our  own  country.     Popery  was  the  tion,see  declared,  —  or  the  very  term 

charge  against  all  the  bishops  in  the  employed,  in   Neal's  Purit.  vol.  ii.  p. 

reigns  of  Elizabeth,  of  Charles  I.  and  45 ;  and  in  Laud  against  Fisher,  s.  xxi. 

of  James  II.     It  has  ever  been  the  cry  n.  vi.  p.  9  ;  Blunt  on  the  39th  Art.  p. 

28 


218 


THE   AMERICAN    SUCCESSION    ALSO    DOUBTFUL.       [LECT.  IX. 


Neither  are  these  doubts  confined  to  the  Anglican  or  Ro- 
man—  they  extend  also  to  the  American,  prelacy. 

It  is  well  known  that  many  episcopalians,  both  in  England 
and  in  this  country  have,  on  just  grounds,  regarded  the  prelati- 
cal  character  of  the  nonjuring  bishops  of  Scotland  as  of  a  very 
doubtful  nature.  Bishop  White  informs  us,  that  this  doubt  as  to 
the  validity  of  Bishop  Seabury's  episcopacy,  which  was  received 
from  the  non-juring  succession,  actuated  some  in  directing  the 
convention  to  England  rather  than  to  Scotland,  as  the  source  of 
the  American  episcopate.^ 

Another  ground  of  serious  doubt  as  to  the  full  validity  of  the 
American  episcopate,  arises  from  the  fact,  that  two  of  its  earli- 


4  ;  Hales  and  Dr.  Barrow,  in  Harris's 
Union,  p.  105,  Atn.  ed.;  Taylor  and 
Chillingworth,  in  ibid,  106 ;  Neal's 
Puritans,  vol.  iii.  pp.  193,  366,  &c.; 
Jackson's  Works,  fol.  vol.  iii.  pp.  860, 
8G1,  889,  884;  Oxford  Tracts,  vol.  i. 
pp.  96,  97,  Am.  ed.;  Palmer  on  the 
Ch.  vol.  i.  pp.  86,  415,  429,  297,  443, 
446  ;  James  II.  in  Neal's  Puritans,  vol. 
v.  p.  49  ;  Perkin's  Works,  fol.  vol.  iii. 
p.  236 ;  Cranmer  in  Letters  of  the 
Martyrs,  p.  16;  Bishop  Smith,  in  Bib. 
Repertory,  1836,  p  29;  Jewell  in 
Palmer  on  the  Ch.  vol.  i.  p.  248  ;  Bur- 
net on  the  39  Art.  p.  5,  Page's  ed 
and  pp.  100,  245 ;  Ridley  in  Letters 
of  the  Martyrs,  p.  41  ;  Rose  in  Bib. 
Repertory,  1826,  pp.  417,  418;  Stil- 
lingfleet  in  Burnet  on  39  Art.  p.  100; 
Faber  on  the  Albigenses,  pp.  537,570  ; 
Chillingworth's  Works,  vol.  i.  pp.  66, 
108,  109,  372;  Potter  in  ibid,  p.  89; 
Ancient  Christianity,  vol  i.  pp.  435, 
436,449,545;  Palmer  on  the  Ch.  vol. 
ii.  p,  456  ;  Dodsworth  on  Romanism 
and  Dissent,  in  self-contradiction,  on 
the  Script,  pp.  17,  5  and  3 ;  State  of 
the  Dead,  pp.  9  and  15,  Apost.  Min. 
pp.  8, 10  and  7  ;  Oxford  Tracts,  vol.  i. 
p.  96;  Hooker's  Works,  Hanbury's 
ed.  vol.  i.  pp.  12,  13,  where  see  refer- 
ences to  Ainsworth,  and  Stillingfleet ; 
Bishop  Hall's  Works,  vol.  viii.  pp.  52, 
53  and  91,  393,  423,  457,  479,  «fcc.; 
Bishops  Jewell  and  Noel,  in  Hooker's 
Works,  as  above,  vol.  i  p.  201,  note; 
se«j  also,  as  evidence  of  the  general 
admission  of  this  fact  at  that  time. 
Jus  Divinum,  Min.  Evang.  pp  39, 40  ; 
Rutherford's  Plea  for  Paul's  Presby- 
tery, p.  340;  Rutherford's  Due  Right 
of  Presbyteries,  p.  340 ;  Morning  Ex- 
ercises agt.  Popery,  p.  492,  serm.  xiv.; 
Salter's  Hall  Sermons,  vol.  ii.  sermon 
by  Mr.  Lowman;    Southwark    Lect. 


agt.  Popery,  vol.  i.  sermon  on  this 
very  subject,  by  Mr.  Vinck;  Hooker 
in  Works,  vol.  i.  p.  270,  Hanbury's  ed. 
Eccl.  Pol.  B.  iv.  Sec.  4 ;  Bishop  Bull's 
Vind.  of  the  Ch.  of  Eng.  pp.  234,236, 
Oxf  ed.;  Bishop  Sherlock  in  Notes  of 
the  Church  exam,  and  refuted,  new 
ed.  p.  55  ;  Bishop  Van  Mildert,  Bamp- 
ton  Lect.  vol.  i.  p.  285  ;  Archbishop 
Whateley,  Origin  of  Romish  Errors, 
pp  313,317;  Dr.  Claggett  in  Notes 
of  the  Ch.  &c.  pp.  185,  186,  195; 
Overton's  True  Churchman,  p.  18; 
Lond.  Christian  Observer,  1837,  p. 
184;  Stillingfleet's  Irenicum,  2d  ed. 
1662,  pp.  115,  116,  117,  118,  &c.; 
Archbishop  Wake  is  very  express  in 
one  of  his  discourses,  as  quoted  by 
Mr.  Bristed,  in  his  Thoughts  on  the 
American-Anglo  Churches,  p.  429, 
N.  Y.  1H22;  The  Church  Dictionary, 
by  the  Rev.  Wm.  Staunton,  N.  York, 
1839,  p.  419;  The  Apostolical  Suc- 
cession in  the  Church  of  England,  by 
Rev.  Henry  Gary,  Reading,  1836,  p. 
6  ;  see  Dr.  Hammond,  and  Dr.  Bram- 
hall,  also  referred  to  in  Troughton's 
Apology  for  Nonconf.  Lond.  1681,  p. 
114. 

Let  any  man  that  doubts  the  cer- 
tainty of  this  separation,  look  into 
Palmer's  Treatise  on  the  Church,  vol. 
i.  part  2,  where  he  stales  at  length  the 
changes  that  were  introduced  by  regal 
supremacy,  and  attempts —  but  most 
feebly  —  to  obviate  their  force  ;  and  he 
will  at  once  perceive  that  if  a  change 
in  every  thing  important  and  implying 
the  highest  exercise  of  authority, is  suf- 
ficient to  characterize  a  new  church, 
then  is  the  Church  of  England  a  new 
and  a  separated  church. 

1)  Mem.  of  Prot.  Ep.  Ch.  pp.  13, 
124  and  135. 


LECT.   IX. J      THK    AMEIUCAN    SUCCESSIOIN    ALSO    DOUBTFUL.  i]9 

est  bisiiops  never  received  baptism  from  episcopal  hands,*  and 
of  course  could  never  have  received  that  grace  which  is  trans- 
mitted by  such  a  ministration,  and  which  is  afterwards  more  fully- 
ratified  and  secured  by  confirmation.  It  is  certainly  a  most  rea- 
sonable fear,  to  be  entertained  by  all  who  receive  the  prelatic 
doctrine  of  baptismal  justification  and  regeneration,  that  he 
who  is  not  justified  or  regenerated,  and  therefore  not  a  christian 
at  all,  cannot  possibly  be  a  fit  subject  for  episcopal  consecra- 
tion. Nor  will  tiie  argument,  by  which  such  fears  are  to  be 
removed,  —namely,  that  if  this  application  of  the  doctrine  is  al- 
lowed, then  "there  is  no  certainty  of  the  existence  of  a  bishop 
in  Christendom,  —  do  any  service  to  the  hierarchy;"^  —  since 
this  consequence  is,  as  we  contend,  unavoidably  necessary,  and 
is,  therefore,  entirely  subversive  of  this  scheme  of  prelatical 
succession. 

Neither  is  there  any  escape  from  this  disastrous  conclusion, 
in  the  determination  given  by  the  archbishop  and  bishops  in 
London,  who,  "  in  order  to  prevent  any  advantages  that  might 
be  taken  by  dissenters,"  agreed,  that  while  lay-baptism  .should 
be  discouraged,  yet  "if  the  essentials  had  been  preserved  in  a 
baptism  by  a  lay-hand,  it  was  not  to  be  repeated,"  or  if  done  in 
cases  of  extremity.^  For  it  is,  after  all,  essential  to  a  valid  pre- 
latic baptism,  that  the  grace  of  it  should  come  from  prelatical 
hands,  which,  in  the  cases  before  us,  it  did  not  ;  neither  were 
these  cases  of  extremity  at  all. 

A  still  further  source  of  anxiety  for  the  entire  validity  of  the 
American  prelacy,  and  for  all  the  consequent  ordinations  of  the 
church,  has  arisen  from  the  omission  of  what  was,  by  some,  re- 
garded as  a  very  essential  part  of  the  form,  in  the  consecra- 
tion, both  of  Bishop  Hobart,  and  of  Bishop  Griswold.  It  was 
publicly  declared,  at  the  time,  that  the  act  "  was  essentially  de- 
fective," and  that  the  episcopal  succession,  through  future  ages, 
was  certainly  invalidated.  And  how  it  can  be  otherwise,  on  a 
theory  which  attaches  such  importance  to  words  and  forms,  may 
very  well  admit  of  a  most  serious  question.* 

1)  Ibid,  p.  283.  "  Serious  Thoughts  on  a  late  adminis- 

2)  White's  Mem.  Prot.  Ep.  Ch  tration  of  Episcopal  Orders,  submitted 
p.  283.  to  the  calm  reflection  of  the  Bishops 

3)  [bid,  p  284.  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church, 

4)  Bishop  White,  ibid,  pp.  287  with  a  Postscript  in  answer  to  Dr. 
and  288.  This  controversy  was  car-  Bowden's  Essentials  of  Ordination 
ried  on  in  the  newspapers  and  in  Stated."  (New  York.  March,  1812,  p. 
pamphlet  form,  and  with  the  greatest  KO  )  In  this  work,  the  author  sliows, 
ardor  In  Dr.  Sprague's  collection  of  from  numerous  standard  authorities, 
pamphlets  in  the  library  of  Princeton  that  by  all  the  laws  of  the  church,  the 
seminary,  (vol.  ccccxxii.,)  may  be  exact  form  of  prescribed  words  for 
seen  an  elaborate  pamphlet,  entitled,  ordination    are     essential,    and    that 


220 


THE   AMERICAN    SUCCESSION    ALSO    DOUBTFUL.  [LECT.  IX. 


On  this  doctrine,  therefore,  of  the  apostolical  succession,  the 
claim  of  the  American  episcopal  church  to  an  unbroken  and 
unin validated  succession,  must  be  allowed  to  be  very  weak  in- 
deed. The  chain,  if  ever  it  extended  across  the  Atlantic  be- 
fore 1787,  was  assuredly  broken  when  even  the  semblance  of 
a  previous  union  was  shivered  by  the  storm  of  the  revolution, 
and,  when  the  episcopal  churches  found  themselves  without 
union,  without  a  head,  and  without  any  accessible  source  of 
episcopal  grace. ^  And  when  to  this  fearful  break  in  their  boast- 
ed line,  we  add  the  other  invalidating  defects  in  the  composi- 
tion of  the  links  themselves;  there  is  surely  enough  to  exclude 
all  boasting  on  the  part  of  the  American  prelacy,  on  the  ground 
of  any  certain  and  unbroken  succession  of  duly  consecrated 
prelates.'' 


without  them  the  alleged  ordination 
is  invalid.  On  p.  27,  he  says :  "  From 
the  considerations  which  have  been 
offered,  serious  doubts  at  least  are  en- 
tertained by  many  of  its  pious  and  of 
its  intelligent  members,  of  the  validity 
of  the  consecration  supposed  to  be  ad- 
ministered, «&c."  ..."  Suppose  these 
doubts  be  well-founded  ....  Suppose 
that  at  some  future  period,  when  the 
heat  of  passion  is  allayed,  when  calm 
reflection  is  suffered  to  be  called  in 
exercise,  that  then  it  shall  be  found 
and  acknowledged  that  the  considera- 
tions here  advanced  have  weight,  and 
that  the  consecration  is  attended  with 
an  essential  defect ;  what  will  then  be 
the  state  of  our  church  ?  Our  priest- 
hood   INVALID,  our  SUCCESSION  LOST; 

numbers,  under  a  show  of  ordination, 
ministering  without  authority ;  the 
evil  so  extended  as  to  be  beyond  the 
power  of  correction."  (p.  27.)  "  For 
myself,  I  am  seriously  and  consci- 
entiously persuaded  that  the  omission 
of  the  solemn  words  is  material,  that 
it  is  essential,  that  it  renders  the  whole 
form  besides  an  utter  nullity."  (pp.  28, 
29.)  See  his  quotations  from  the  Ru- 
brics, &.C.,  on  pp.  24,  25. 

"  On  this  subject,"  says  Dr.  Milner, 
"  our  controversialists  urge  not  only 
the  authority  of  all  the  Latin  and 
Greek  ordinals,  but  also  the  confer- 
ence of  the  above-named  protestant 
divine.  Mason,  who  says,  with  evident 
truth,  '  not  every  form  of  words  will 
well  serve;  but  such  as  are  signifi- 
cant of  the  power  conveyed  by  the 
order.' "  End  of  Controv.,  letter 
ixix.  p.  182.    On  this  grroand  he  luges 


the  invalidity  of  all  consecrations 
during  the  reigns  of  Edward  and 
Elizabeth,  and  of  course  ever  after. 

1)  The  connexion  of  the  episco- 
pal churches  in  this  country  with  the 
bishop  of  London,  was  very  partial. 
"His  authority,"  says  Bishop  White, 
(The  Case  of  the  Episcopal  Churches 
in  the  United  States  considered,  17&2, 
p  (i,)  "  was  derived  under  a  commis- 
sion from  the  crown  ;  which,  though 
destitute  of  legal  operation,  found  a 
general  acquiescence  on  the  part  of 
the  churches,  being  exercised  no 
further  than  to  the  necessary  purposes 
of  ordaining  and  licensing  ministers." 
And  therefore,  by  the  revolution  which 
threw  off  all  allegiance  to  the  crown, 
"  all  former  jurisdiction  over  the 
churches  being  thus  withdrawn,  and 
the  chain  which  held  them  together 
broken,  it  would  seem,"  says  the 
bishop,  *'  that  their  future  continuance 
can  be  provided  for  only  by  volunta- 
ry ASSOCIATIONS  for  UNION  and  good 

GOVERNMENT." 

"  An  episcopal  church  without 
bishops,  is  like  a  body  without  a  head  ; 
and  an  episcopal  church  that  has 
bishops  only  in  a  distant  region  of  the 
earth,  is  nearly  in  the  same  situation." 
(Address  to  the  Episcopalians  of  Vir- 
ginia, by  the  Clergy  of  N.  York  and 
N.  Jersey,  1771,  p.  55.)  "  One  writer 
against  American  bishops,  in  the  |)a- 
pers  of  Virginia,  ppeaks  of  the  church 
of  Virginia  as  an  independent  society, 
making  no  part  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land."    Ibid,  p  56. 

2)  See  this  subject  further  con- 
sidered in  a  future  Lecture,  No.  xvi. 


LECT.  IX.]       ONE    INVALIDITY    DESTROYS    THE    SUCCESSION.  221 

Our  opponents  would  feign  persuade  us  to  turn  away  our  at- 
tention from  the  doubtful  parts  of  this  chain,  to  those  links 
whose  strength  and  brightness  are  most  evident.  But  surely  in 
so  doing,  they  make  a  most  unreasonable  request  on  their  part, 
and  assume  the  absence  of  all  reason  on  ours.  For  it  must  be 
with  this  unbroken  chain  of  prelatic  ordinations,  as  it  is  with 
any  material  chain  ;  —  its  strength  must  be  estimated  not  by  its 
strongest,  but  by  its  weakest  links.  Let  all  the  links  but  one 
be  as  massy  as  it  is  possible  they  can  be,  and  only  let  one  be 
weak,  or  badly  united  to  the  rest,  and  the  whole  chain  will  be 
as  feeble  as  is  that  weakest  link  ;  since,  by  its  destruction,  ev- 
ery thing  that  is  dependent  on  it,  must  be  infallibly  lost.  If, 
therefore,  there  should  be  found  but  one  isolated  link  in  this  en- 
tire chain  of  apostolical  succession,  that  is  invalid,  doubtful,  or 
false,  —  and  who  will  deny  that  there  are  such? — then  must 
the  whole  chain  be  invalid,  doubtful,  or  false,  and  all  the  claims 
and   prerogatives   which   issue  from   it,  be  assuredly  destroyed. 

It  will  answer,  therefore,  no  purpose  whatever,  for  prelatists 
to  draw  out,  in  long  array,  a  catalogue  of  high  and  honored 
names,  which  have  adorned  this  prelatical  succession  ;  or  to 
apologize  for  cases  of  apparent  interruption  ;  for,  unless  they 
can  substantiate  the  soundness  of  every  single  Hnk  in  the  un- 
broken chain,  their  labor  is  worse  than  in  vain.' 

Prelatists  are  very  sensible  of  the  weakness  of  their  cause. 
They  know  well,  that  with  all  the  confidence  of  their  boasting, 
no  sufficient  historic  evidence  can  be  possibly  produced  in  sub- 
stantiation of  their  vain  pretensions. '^ 

They  employ,  therefore,  every  possible  artifice  to  blind  the 
eyes  of  men,  and  to  lead  our  minds  away  from  the  true  ques- 
tion at  issue.  It  is,  therefore,  very  plausibly  urged,  that  if  the 
evidence  for  this  uninterrupted  succession  is  rejected,  then  must 
that  given  for  the  scriptures  themselves  be  also  thrown  aside  ; 
and  that  we  are  therefore  called  upon,  by  our  reverence  for  the 
Bible,  to  reverence,  also,  this  prelatic  succession.  But  this  argu- 
ment is  entirely  fallacious,  and  its  premises  without  foundation, 

I)    Mr.  Keble,  speaking  of  "  the  tradition.     We   deny,  therefore,  that 

succession,  and  the  grace  conveyed  by  it  has  any  claim  to  divine  authority, 

it,"   says  that,   "  till  disproved,  they  and  that  to  act  upon  it,  is  a  presump- 

ought  to  be  acted  on."      (Primitive  tuous  usurpation  of  the  prerogative  of 

Tradition,  p.  105.)      But  this  surely  Christ. 

is  a  most  unwarrantable  assumption  2)  Mr.  Percival,  in  his  work  on 

of  the   very  point  under  discussion,  Apostolic  Succession,  seems  to  admit 

and  a  plain  reversion  of  what  is  the  that    a    sufficient   historic   testimony 

rule  in  the  case.     This  doctrine,  it  is  cannot    be    given.      "  If,"    says    he, 

averred,  is  by  divine  right,  and  neces-  "  nothing  will  satisfy  men  but  actual 

sary.     We  deny  that   it  can  be  bus-  demonstration,    (that    is,   historic,)    I 

tained,  either  by  scripture  or  primitive  yiild  at  once."  P.  19,  Eng.  ed. 


222  NO    PROOF    OF   AN    UNBROKEN    SUCCESSION.  [lECT.  IX. 

since  it  is  utterly  untrue,  that  there  is  as  much  proof  for  the  unin- 
terrupted line  of  prelatical  succession,  as  there  is  for  the  genu- 
ineness and  authenticity  of  the  scriptures. 

For,  while  both  appeal,  for  authentication,  to  the  evidence 
derived  from  human  testimony;  the  tradition  by  which  the  au- 
thenticity of  the  scriptures  is  proved,  connects  itself,  as  has 
been  observed,  by  an  unbroken  chain  of  direct  testimony,  with 
the  matter  to  be  proved.  The  documents  themselves  claim  to 
be  given  by  apostolical  authority,  and  present  sufficient  internal 
evidence  of  the  truth  of  this  claim  ;  and  therefore,  every  testi- 
mony given  to  their  general  truth,  directly  substantiates  their 
claim  to  such  authority.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  the  chain  of 
evidence  for  this  uninterrupted  lineal  succession,  is  Hot  unbro- 
ken ;  and  does  not  go  up  to  the  time  of  its  alleged  beginning. 
And,  since  this  doctrine  is  in  itself  preposterous,  and  niost  un- 
reasonable ;  and  contains,  therefore,  no  evidence  of  its  own  di- 
vine original ;  it  is  perfectly  obvious,  that  while  the  authenticity 
of  the  scriptures  may  be  proved  by  testimony,  the  truth  of  this 
pretended  claim  never  can,  and  that  there  is  no  analogy  be- 
tween the  two  cases,  either  as  it  regards  the  object  to  be  proved, 
or  the  evidence  by  which  it  is  sustained. 

It  has  been  further  urged,  in  opposition  to  our  demand  for 
the  confirmation  of  the  title  of  every  link  in  this  "  unbroken 
line,"  —  as  has  been  recently  done,  by  the  present  dean  of  the 
cathedral  in  Derry  — that  we  cannot  properly  require  more  than 
probable  evidence  for  the  facts  in  question,  and  that  on  the 
principle  of  the  statute  of  limitations,  all  such  objections  against 
events  of  such  remote  antiquity  are  precluded,  by  their  own 
absurdity.' 

1)    See   Letters   on    Episcopacy,  "  But,"  says  Dr.  Mitchell,  (Letters 

&c.,  by  the   Rev.  A.  Boyd,  pp.  ItiO,  to  Bishop  Skinner,  p.  I!l2,)  "  do  you 

161.  rest  the  credit  of  your  episcopal  suc- 

"  It  is  an  objection,"  says  Dr.  Bow-  cession  purely  on  your  own  assertion, 

den,  (Letters,  first  series,  xxi.  vol.  ii.  that  you  are  the  lineal  progeny  of  the 

pp.  272,  N.  Y.  1808,)  "that  sometimes  apostles.'     Oh,   no;  you  prove  it  by 

meets  us,  that  an  uninterrupted  sue-  what    you    facetiously  call  '  a  clear, 

cession  cannot  be  proved   by  written  satisfactory  train    of   reasoning.'      A 

records.     This   is    really   very    weak,  clear,  satisfactory  train  of  reasoning  ! 

We  do  not  want  records  to  prove  the  Can  any  train  of  reasoning  suf>ersede 

successitm  of  the    ministry.      Its   di-  the  necessity  of  proving  facts  in  the 

vine   institution,  and   the   promise  to  history  of  man,  by  that  which   alone 

be  with  it,  to  the  end  of  the  world,  is  can   prove  tliem,  credible  testimony  .' 

a  better   proof  of  succession    than  a  You   may  demonstrate  truths  by  rea- 

inillion  of  volumes   would   be.     But,  soning,  but  1  never  heard  that  reason- 

although  I  deem  this  a  sufficient  an-  ing  can  prove  historical  facts;  though 

Bwer  to  the  objection,  yet  I  will  meet  1  know,  that  in  tlie  course  of  human 

it  in  another  way  :   I   say,  then,  that  affairs,  many  facts  occur   that  baffle 

we  have  records,  equal  to  those  for  a  all  reasoning  a  priori,  and  set  even  the 

succession  of  the  raanuscripts  of  the  conjectures  of  the  most  profound  wis- 

Bible."  dom  at  defiance.     Surely,  you  mean 


LECT.   IX. J  NO    PBOOF    OF    AN    UNBKOKEN    SUCCESSION.  223 

But  to  this,  it  must  be  replied,  that  there  is  no  analogy  in 
the  case  presented,  in  bar  of  our  conclusion.  For,  in  the  first 
place,  the  very  claim  in  question,  is  made  to  depend  upon  the 
unbroken  line  of  this  succession.  In  the  second  place,  we  re- 
mark, that  the  transmission  of  the  sacred  gift,  is  alleged  to  de- 
pend upon  the  personal  validity  of  each  descendant,  in  this 
hereditary  line  of  apostolical  succession.  Thirdly,  we  would 
say,  that,  in  the  case  before  us,  there  is,  as  is  confessed,  no  such 
statute  of  limitations.  On  the  contrary,  we  are  assured,  that  this 
lineal  succession,  and  the  claim  resting  upon  it,  is  to  continue 
to  the  end  of  time,  as  the  peculiar  mark  of  the  true  catholic 
church.  And  finally,  we  would  say,  that  these  breaks  in  the 
chain  of  this  boasted  descent,  can  be  pointed  out,  at  its  very  be- 
ginning, and  from  thence  downwards,  and  that  we  defy  all  the 
industry  of  man  to  make  good  the  soundness  of  any  one  pre- 
tended link  in  any  part  of  this  existing  chain.  The  plea,  there- 
fore, is  unavailing,  and  our  demand  for  the  perfect  establishment 
of  the  purity  of  each  separate  link,  remains  in  all  its  force. 

Bring,  then,  these  prelatical  claims  to  the  standard  of  histori- 
cal verity,  and  they  are  found  to  be  incapable  of  any  satisfacto- 
ry proof.^  Tried  by  those  tests  which  are  approved  as  just  and 
necessary,  not  one  single  link  in  the  whole  chain  can  be  sub- 
stantiated. We  were,  indeed,  boldly  told,  that  every  individual 
in  this  Anglican  hierarchy  is  able  to  bring  out,  from  the  sacred 
ark,  this  unbroken  and  uninterrupted  chain,  and  exhibit  it  to 
the  confusion  of  every  doubting  infidel. 

Now  we  have,  with  some  diligence,  put  ourselves  to  school 
to  many  masters  in  Israel,  and  faithfully  scanned  their  manuals 
of  instruction.  And  we  have  wondered  with  an  increasing 
amazement,  that,  up  to  this  moment,  we  have  been  able  to  find 
so  little  beyond  the  reiteration  of  this  same  confident  boasting. 
We  have  yet  to  find  tlie  man  who,  with  the  rashness  of  Phaeton, 
can  cast  himself  upon  the  devious  void  of  that  bottomless  abyss, 
by  which  we  are  dissevered  from  the  birth-hour  of  Christianity  ; 

to  jost  with  us,  when  you  speak  of  or  an  institute,  it  TS  IMPOSSIBLE, 

proving  facts  by  'a  clear,  satisfactory  at  all  events,  to  PROVE  the  FACT 

train  of  reasoning.'  "  of  SUCH  SUCCESSION,  or  to  trace 

1)  That  the  succession  tested  by  it  down  the   stream  of  time.     In  this 

history  cannot  be  sustained,  see  ar-  case,  the    fact  seems   to  involve  the 

gued  in  Dr.  Willet's  Syn.  Pap.  pp.  82  doctrine;    and  if  the  fact  be   hope- 

B3.  LESSI.Y  obscure,  the  doctrine  is  ir- 

The  Rev.  J.  E.  Riddle,  in  his  recent  recovekably  lost."     "  It  is  impossi- 

and  very  extensive  work  on  "  Christ,  bie  to  prove  the  personal  succession 

Antiquities,"  and  under  his  "  Plea  for  of  modern    bishops,   in    an  unbroken 

Episopacy,"  «!kc  (Lond.  1839,  p.  Ixxii.  episcopal    line,   from   the  apostles  or 

Pref.  ],)  says.  "  whatever  may  become  men  of  the  apostolic  age." 
of  the  apostolic  succession  as  a  theory 


224  THE    SUCCESSION    UTTERLY    HOPELESS.  [lECT.  IX. 

and  who,  having  carried  this  golden  chain  safely  and  unharmed 
across  tliat  perilous  way,  can  grasp,  with  firm  hand,  the  throne 
of  apostolic  power,  and  fix  it  in  that  sure  foundation.  It  is  not 
the  closing  links  in  this  progression,  of  which  we  stand  most  in 
jeopardy,  and  for  which  we  demand  far  —  far  clearer  evidence; 
though  even  these,  as  we  have  seen,  are  but  of  a  very  doubtful 
character,  if  not,  indeed,  hopelessly  uncertain.  We  can,  how- 
ever, for  argument's  sake,  suppose  our  skepticism  silenced, 
though  not  satisfied,  as  far  as  regards  the  period  of  the  refor- 
mation. 

But  how  can  any  man  attempt  to  sustain  the  validity  and  the 
certainty  of  this  personal  succession,  during  all  previous  ages? 
Who  shall  lift  this  ponderous  chain,  even  at  its  connexion  with 
the  reformation,  and  carry  it  backwards,  until  it  is  appended  to 
Christ  Jesus,  the  rock  of  ages  —  the  cause  of  causes  ?  —  so  that 
from  him  may  proceed  that  influence  which  may  propagate 
downwards  to  the  very  last  point,  in  the  lengthening  series. 
We  again  challenge  the  proof  which  has  been  so  boldly  offered. 
And,  in  default  of  this — and  assuredly  it  is  wanting  at  every 
stage  —  we  fearlessly  scout  the  whole  hypothesis,  as  wild,  chi- 
merical, fictitious,  and  unsupported  either  by  history  or  scrip- 
ture. 


ADDITIONAL  NOTE   TO   LECTURE  NINTH. 


NOTE  A. 

As  to  the  character  of  the  individuals  who  constitute  this  line,  it  is  unnec- 
essary to  enlarge  much.  A  few  notices  may  be  given  of  these  infallible  heads 
of  the  infallible  church. 

Episcopius,  in  his  Labyrinth,  or  Popish  Circle,  Arg.  vi.  (republ.  in  S.  Chr. 
Advoc.  Ap.  2,  1841,)  in  refuting  this  claim  of  the  succession,  says  : 

"  But  who  shall  show  us  the  truth,  and  give  us  the  fullest  assurance  of  it .'' 
Shall  the  true  church  .■'  But  where  or  which  is  that .'  This  cannot  be  shown. 
For  after  the  succession  of  persons  has  been  proved,  it  is  still  neither  certain 
nor  indubitable,  that  the  church  which  has  the  succession,  has  the  truth  on  its 
side,  or  has  always  been  exempt  from  heresy  ;  and  by  consequence,  whether 
it  has  the  right  and  power  of  determining  that  it  is  the  true  church.  What 
church  then  is  it  which  will  infallibly  point  out  to  us  and  say,  "  This  is  true  ;" 
and  that,  on  the  contrary,  is  heretical  ?  For  a  church  that  is  without  the  suc- 
cession, cannot,  according  to  the  Jesuits,  do  this,  nor  can  even  that  church 
which  has  the  succession,  as  appears  from  the  principles  already  laid  down. 
What  end  is  there  then  to  all  this  ?  It  is  impossible  for  a  papist  to  untie  this 
knot.  To  this  I  also  add,  let  it  be  granted  that  no  heretical  bishops  have 
intervened  in  the  line  of  succession,  but  only  such  as  have  by  force,  faction, 
popular  tumult  or  bribes,  intruded  themselves  into  the  apostolical  see, — where 
then,  1  inquire,  will  be  the  succession  ?  For  must  we  believe  that  holy  and 
saving  truth  can  better  consist  with  these  nefarious  practices,  than  with  heresy 
or  error  .''  Nay,  further,  — if  it  is  a  matter  of  historical  record,  that  for  fifty  or 
eighty  years  together,  there  have  been  two  or  three  popes  at  the  same  time  ; 
one  of  them  denying  to  another  the  very  name  of  christian,  reproaching  each 
other  with  the  appellations  of  heretic  and  antichrist,  and  each  pronouncing 
the  other  an  unlawful  pope  ;  that  one  cut  off  two  of  the  fingers  of  his  prede- 
cessor ;  dug  up  the  bodies  of  others  from  their  graves,  and  having  insulted 
their  ashes,  ordered  them  to  be  cast  into  the  Tiber;  —  that  sometimes  all  the 
three  popes  together,  were  condemned  and  degraded  by  a  general  council,  as 
false  popes,  heretics,  and  ungodly  wretches,  not  even  to  be  reckoned  in  the 
number  of  christians  ;  and  that  nevertheless  many  bishops  and  clergy  were 
ordaiued  by  these  false  popes, — in  what  manner  is  the  broken  thread  of  the 
succession  to  be  united .'  For,  if  it  be  said,  for  example,  '  That  the  pope  is 
to  be  accounted  a  true  one,  who,  in  the  time  of  the  council  of  Constance,  was 
by  common  consent,  put  in  the  place  of  the  three  popes  deposed  by  that  coun- 
cil, and  who  succeeded  to  the  last  deceased  legitimate  pope,  the  apostolical 
see  having  in  the  meantime  been  vacant,  and  usurped  by  force;"  he  will 
enter  into  a  new  labyrinth,  because  many  of  the  popish  doctors,  Bellarmine  in 
particular,  and  all  the  Jesuits,  deliver  and  urge  it  as  their  opinion,  that  the 
council  of  Constance  is,  in  this  respect,  to  be  regarded  as  unlawful,  inasmuch 
as  it  decreed  that  a  council  is  above  the  pope,  and  because  it  was  not  approved 
by  that  impious  man,  Pope  John  XXIII.  or  XXIV.  who  had  convened  it,  and 
was  by  its  sentence  deposed,  or  by  the  pope  whom  the  council  appointed  in 
his  stead.  For  if  this  council  is  not  in  that  respect  to  be  considered  a  lawful 
one,  how  then  shall  a  lawful  succession  be  established  ?  Would  the  approval 
of  so  infamous  a  man  as  Pope  John,  who  was  charged  by  the  council  itself 
with  atheism,  have  rendered  this  assembly  a  lawful  one.'  It  is  shameful  to 
make  such  an  assertion  ;    and  it  would  be  much  more  shameful  to  assert,  that 

29 


226  NOTE     TO    LECTURE    IX. 

the  council  wag  unlawful,  solely  because  it  was  not  approved  by  him.  Or 
would  it  have  been  a  lawful  council,  if  it  had  received  the  approbation  of  the 
succeeding  pope  ?  But  it  will  then  indeed  appear  to  be  unlawful  ;  because  the 
man  who  was  constituted  pope  by  this  council  did  not  say  that  lie  and  others 
in  similar  circumstances  with  himself  were  subject  to  a  council ;  but  on  the 
contrary,  in  imitation  of  Lucifer,  son  of  the  morning,  strenuously  asserted  that 
he  was  superior  to  any  council,  —  though  it  is  highly  credible,  that  he  approv- 
ed of  the  decree  of  the  council  before  he  was  chosen  pope.  Now  who  does  not 
see  in  all  this,  a  circle  of  absurdities  ?  For  whichever  way  you  take  it,  the 
perplexity  presents  itself,  if  the  authority  of  the  council  of  Constance  was 
not  higher  than  that  of  the  i>opc,  it  could  not  have  deposed  the  pope;  in  this 
case,  therefore,  those  infamous  popes  are  to  be  reckoned  among  the  legitimate- 
ly succeeding  bishops,  in  a  continued  succession,  which  was  not  interrupted 
by  reason  of  their  heresy,  atheism,  simony,  violence,  and  other  abominable 
wickedness.  On  the  other  hand,  if  an  interruption  through  these  crimes  and 
heresies  be  granted,  then  the  succession  is  at  once  vitiated  and  destroyed,  for 
the  same  reason  as  that  which  Bellarmine  gives,  to  prove  that  the  succession 
in  the  Greek  church  ought  not  to  be  accounted  a  legitimate  one." 

Pope  John  XH.  in  a  synod  held  at  Rome,  was  (Bishop  Fowler  in  Notes  of 
the  Ch.  p.  255,  from  Luitprand  Hist.  lib.  n.  cap.  6  —  10,  pp.  153  — 158,)  for- 
mally accused  before  Otho  the  Great,  viz  :  "  The  ordaining  a  deacon  in  a  sta- 
ble; the  committing  of  adultery  and  incest ;  the  putting  out  the  eyes  of  a  holy 
man  ;  the  drinking  a  health  to  the  god  of  this  world  ;  the  invoking  of  Jupiter 
and  Venus  when  he  was  at  dice,  in  favor  of  his  cast.  The  synod  sat,  the  wit- 
nesses were  ready,  his  piesence  was  urged  by  the  emperor  and  by  the  synod. 
He  refused  to  appear  ;  and  instead  of  purging  himself,  he  sent  this  menace  to 
the  synod,  '  That  if  the  fathers  deposed  him,  he  would  excommunicate  all  of 
them,  and  make  them  incapable  of  ordaining  and  celebrating  mass.'  " 

The  following  is  the  confession  of  Father  Paul  of  the  order  of  the  Servites, 
and  consulter  of  state  of  the  republic  of  Venice,  in  his  Treatise  of  Benefices 
and  Revenues.  (Westminster,  1727,  pp.  60  —  63,  without  the  notes,  and 
p.  64.) 

"  From  this  time  until  the  year  963,  during  the  space  of  80  years,  wherein 
Italy  labored  under  the  extremes!  confusions,  as  well  in  the  civil  government 
as  ecclesiastical,  especially  in  the  papacy,  we  must  not  expect  to  find  any 
traces  or  form  of  good  government  in  the  church,  but  a  mere  chaos  of  impie- 
ties, and  a  general  preparative  and  forerunner  of  the  miserable  revolutions  and 
disorders  wliicli  followed. 

"  Popes  were  then  excommunicated  b)'  their  successors,  and  their  acts  cursed 
and  annulled  :  not  excepting  the  very  administration  of  the  sacraments.  Six 
popes  were  driven  out  and  dethroned  by  those  who  aspired  to  their  places ; 
two  popes  put  to  death,  ond  Pope  Sleplien  VIII.  wounded  in  the  face,  with 
so  much  deformity,  that  he  never  appeared  in  public.  Theodora,  a  famous 
courtesan,  by  the  interest  and  faction  she  had  then  in  Rome,  got  her  professed 
lover  chosen  pope,  who  was  called  John  X.  And  John  XI.  was  chosen  pope 
at  the  age  of  20  years,  the  bastard  of  another  pope,  dead  18  years  before.  And 
in  sliort,  such  a  series  of  wild  disorders  gave  occasion  to  historians  to  say,  that 
tiiose  times  produced  not  popes,  but  monsters. 

"  Cardinal  Baronius,  being  under  some  difficulty  how  to  treat  these  corrup- 
tions, saith,  that  in  those  days  the  church  indeed  was  for  the  most  part  without 
a  pope,  but  not  without  a  head  ;  its  spiritual  head  Christ  being  in  heaven, 
who  never  abandons  it.  In  effect  it  is  certain,  that  Christ  hath  never  yet 
forsook  his  church  ;  neither  can  his  divine  promise  which  he  hath  made  us 
f. lil,  that  he  will  be  with  it  even  to  the  end  of  the  world.  And  on  this  occa- 
sion it  is  the  duty  of  every  christian  to  believe  with  Baronius,  that  the  same 
calamities  wliich  happened  in  the  world  at  that  time,  hath  happened  also  at 
another. 

"  So  that  a  pope  was  not  necessary  to  the  existence  of  a  church,  even  though 
there  should  never  more  have  been  a  pope. 

"  But  the  general  state  of  the  church  was  then  in  truth  every  where  else  as 
deplorable.  Princes  gave  bishoprics  to  their  soldiers,  and  even  to  little  children. 
Count  Herebert,  uncle  to  Hugh  Capet,  made  his  son  archbishop  of  Rheims; 
and  Pope  John  X.  confirmed  it." 


NOTE    TO    LECTURE    IX.  227' 

"  How  hideous,"  exclaims  Baronius,  (ad.  ann.OOOin  Presb.  Let.  pp.  251,25Ji,) 
"  was  the  face  of  the  Roman  church,  when  filthy  and  impudent  whores  governed 
all  at  Rome,  changed  sees  at  pleasure,  disposed  of  bishoprics,  and  intruded  their 
gallants  and  their  bullies  into  the  see  of  St.  Peter  !  The  canons  were  trodden 
under  foot,"  &c. 

"  He  acknowledges  with  a  candor  that  is  highly  honorable  to  him,  that  the 
episcopal  succession  did  actually  fail  in  the  ninth  and  tenth  centuries  ;  for 
he  calls  the  popes  of  those  times  usurpers  (invasores  apostoliccc  sedis,)  and  not 
apostolic  bishops,  but  apostates.  Nay,  he  confesses  explicitly,  that  the  church 
was  then,  for  the  most  part,  without  a  pope,  though  not  without  a  head,  Jesus 
Christ  being  in  heaven.  Platina  joins  the  cardinal,  and  says,  that,  when 
almost  all  the  popes  were  raised  to  the  throne  by  simony,  by  violence  and  out- 
rage, or  by  the  intrigues  of  vile  courtesans,  the  see  of  St.  Peter  was  seized,  not 
possessed,  and  seized  by  monsters,  not  popes.  And  yet  those  holy  usurpers, 
apostates,  and  monsters,  and  the  apostates  and  monsters  whom  they  set  in 
every  part  of  the  western  church,  are  your  spiritual  progenitors  !  I  congratu- 
late you  on  your  descent  from  ancestors  so  illustrious.  They  seem  to  me  to 
connect  you  rather  with  Herod  and  Pontius  Pilate,  Nero  and  Caligula,  than 
with  Christ  and  his  apostles." 

Hear  Bishop  Burnet.  In  his  Work  on  the  Articles,  (p.  438  on  Art.  28,)  he  thus 
speaks  :  "  The  writers  of  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries  give  us  dismal  repre- 
sentations of  the  corruptions  of  their  times  ;  and  the  scandalous  inconstancy  of 
the  councils  of  those  ages,  is  too  evident  a  proof  of  what  we  find  said  by  the 
good  men  of  those  days  :  but  things  fell  lower  and  lower  in  the  succeedinor 
ages.  It  is  an  amazing  thing,  that  in  the  very  office  of  consecrating  bishops, 
examinations  are  ordered  concerning  those  crimes,  the  very  mention  of  which 
give  horror.     Dc  Coitu  cum  Musculo  etcum  Quadrupcdibus." 

See  on  this  subject,  "  The  History  of  Popery,"  Lond.  1735,  vol.  i.  pp.  9,  22, 
45,  &c.  See  also,  "  The  Rights  of  the  Christian  Church,"  Lond.  1707,  ed. 
3d.  p.  354,  &c. 

And  now,  in  conclusion,  we  may  say  with  Chillingworth  —  "  It  cannot  be 
believed  that  the  spirit  of  God  descended  through  that  succession  of  prelates, 
who  were  so  many  of  them  so  notoriously  and  confessedly  wicked,  because  he 
is  the  spirit  of  truth  whom  the  world  cannot  receive,  because  it  seeth  him  not, 
neither  knoweth  him."     See  Chillingworth,  vol.  i.  p.  400. 

Hear  also  Isaac  Taylor  :  (Pref  to  Life  of  Luther,  in  Lond.  Chr.  Obs.  Aug. 
1840,  p.  508  :)  "  Then  again  the  historical  proof,  touching  the  church  of  Rome, 
is  complete,  showing  first,  and  by  the  testimony  of  his  adherents,  so  extreme  a 
profligacy  and  ferocity  to  have  ordinarily  belonged  to  the  papal  court  and  hier- 
archy, as  utterly  to  exclude  the  belief  of  a  divine  presence,  favor,  and  super- 
intendence, connected  with  persons  and  with  bodies  of  men  thus  flagrantly 
wicked  and  cruel.  And  secondly,  the  historical  proof  of  palpable  contrarieties 
and  variations  in  doctrine  and  practice,  is  such  as  can  never  be  made  to  con- 
sist with  the  theory  of  a  divinely  sustained  infallibility." 

See  also  Voetius  Desperata  Causa  Papatus,  lib.  iii.  sect.  ii.  cap.  i.  Also 
Rutherford's  Due  Right  of  Presb.  p.  235,  «S:c. 


LECTUEE   X. 


THE  PKELATICAL  DOCTRINE  OF    APOSTOLICAL    SUCCESSION    BROUGHT    TO 
THE  TEST  OF  FACTS. 

It  is  of  God's  infinite  and  free  mercy,  there  is  such  an  insti- 
tution as  the  christian  church.  The  church  is  the  concentra- 
tion—  and,  in  its  visible  form,  the  outward  manifestation, — of 
all  God's  most  gracious  and  innumerable  benefits,  conferred  upon 
our  fallen  and  apostate  world.  It  is  the  ark  prepared  against 
that  last  and  awful  deluge,  which  is  to  overwhelm,  in  remediless 
perdition,  the  whole  race  of  ungodly  men,  —  into  which  we  are 
now  invited  to  enter ;  —  and  by  which  all  who  do  thus  truly  en- 
ter, and  abide  within  it,  shall  be  delivered  in  the  great  day  of 
wrath.  Not  that  there  is  any  thing  either  in  the  forms,  polity, 
or  even  in  the  doctrine  and  sacraments  of  the  church,  which,  in 
themselves  considered,  are  any  the  more  available  to  salvation, 
except  as  they  are  quickened  by  divine  influence,  than  there 
was  any  power  inherent  in  the  boards  with  which  the  ancient 
ark  was  constructed,  apart  from  the  upholding  and  directing  care 
of  the  Almighty,  to  save  and  to  deliver  them  that  entered  it. 
But  God,  in  the  one  case  absolutely,  and  in  the  other  ordinari- 
ly, has  chosen  to  bestow  his  mercy  through  the  instrumentality 
of  his  own  appointment;  and  so,  by  the  church,  is  made  known 
the  wisdom  and  mercy  of  God,  faith  coming  by  hearing,  and 
hearing  by  the  preaching  of  the  word. 

It  is,  therefore,  all-important,  to  be  well  assured  that  we  have 
committed  our  souls  to  a  vessel,  which  will  not  founder  in  the 
dark  night  of  coming  tempest,  when  there  will  be  no  eye  to 
pity,  and  no  hand  to  save. 

Now  prelatists,  both  Romish  and  Anglican  —  to  speak  of  prela- 
cy as  distinct  from  popery  —  affirm  that  there  is  'but  one  church, 
and  that  is  theirs  — but  one  vessel  of  mercy  aforetime  prepared. 


230  BISHOP  seabury's  view  of  this  doctrine,     [lect.  X. 

and  that  they  are  entrusted  with  her  exclusive  management  and 
control.  Tliere  is,  therefore,  no  getting  on  board  but  by  their 
express  permission,  and  assistance  ;  and  whatever  other  craft 
we  may  temerariously  construct  in  the  form  and  figure  of  a 
church,  will  avail  us  nothing  in  the  hour  of  peril.  Thus  we  are 
informed,  "  the  church  has  within  her  power,  a  fountain  of  spir- 
itual blessings,  which  she  can  open  and  shut  —  having  authori- 
ty, which  all  other  denominations  want.'" 

"  The  short  of  the  matter  is  this  "  to  use  the  words  of  Bish- 
op Seabury  :  "  In  the  church  of  Christ,  we  have  the  gov- 
ernment, faith,  sacraments,  worship,  and  ministry  or  priesthood, 
which  are  by  divine  authority :  In  the  use  of  them,  we  can  as- 
suredly depend  on  the  blessings  which  God  hath  annexed  to 
them.  To  this  church  the  Holy  Spirit  is  given.  As  members 
of  it,  we  receive  his  heavenly  graces  and  influences,  to  conduct 
us  to  the  hope  of  our  calling  —  eternal  life  through  Jesus 
the  Redeemer.  Out  of  the  church,  we  are  sure  of  none  of 
these  things  ;  because,  out  of  the  church,  God  hath  not  prom- 
ised them.^ 

"If  then,"  he  continues,  "we  receive  the  Holy  Ghost,  in 
virtue  of  our  being  made  members  of  Christ's  church,  it  will 
follow,  that  if  we  renounce  his  church,  we  renounce  that  Spirit 
which  we  received  by  coming  into  his  church ;  and,  consequent- 
ly, we  renounce  all  that  God  can  do  for  us  ;  for  all  that  God 
can  do  for  us  must  be  done  by  and  through  his  Spirit." 

"  Hence  appears  the  absurdity  of  the  right  so  generally 
claimed  by  christian  professors,  of  forming  their  own  church,  or 
of  joining  any  party  of  people  whom  they  shall  please  to  call  a 
church.  Christ  has  but  one  church  ;  and  if  we  be  not  in  his 
church,  we  are  out  of  it;  and,  let  our  religion  be  ever  so  right 
and  good  in  our  estimation,  it  can  have  no  warranted  title  to 
those  privileges  and  blessings  which  are,  by  divine  authority, 
annexed  to  the  church  of  Christ." 

"  If  we  set  up  a  ministry  by  our  own  authority,  and  call  our 
ministers  Christ's  ministers,  it  will  confer  no  power  from  him 
upon  them  ;  and  the  sacraments  they  shall  administer  can  be 
only  our  sacraments,  and  not  Christ's.  Should  they  preach, 
and  what  they  preach  be  true,  they  have  no  commission  from 
Christ,  and  preach  not  by  his  appointment.  If  we  wish  to 
receive  the  full  benefit  of  the  government,  ministry,  sacraments, 
and  faith,  which  Christ  hath  appointed  for  us,  we  must  have 
them  according  to  his  institution,  or  we  have  no  right  to  apply 

1)  Lond.    Quart.    Rev.    March,  2)  Sermon   on  Christian  Unity, 

1840.    See  p.  280.  Episcopal  Tracts,  No.  xliv.  p.  7. 


LECT.    X.]  THE    ROMISH    VIEW    OF    THIS    DOCTRINE.  231 

to  ourselves  the  gracious  promises  he  hath  made  to  his  church  — 
that  is,  we  must  have  them  according  to  his  own  commission 
and  authority  exercised  in  his  church." 

So,  also,  in  the  Pastoral  Letter  of  the  recent  provincial  coun- 
cil of  Roman  catholic  prelates,  held  in  Baltimore,  "  united  for 
the  purpose  of  consulting  how  to  discharge  the  weighty  obliga- 
tions of  their  apostleship  ;'"  after  a  similar  exhibition  of  the 
doctrine  of  the  one  church,  which  is,  of  course,  that  of  which 
they  are  in  possession  ;  and  of  the  doctrine  of  the  apostolical 
succession  ;  we  are  informed,'  that  "  it  is  plain,  that  as  the  com- 
mission of  the  ministry  was  lodged  with  the  whole  body,  (i.  e. 
the  Roman  catholic  church,)  united  to  its  head,  (i.  e.  the 
pope,)  no  minority  (i.  e.  the  episcopal,  presbyterian,  or  other 
churches,)  however  respectable,  especially  when  opposed  to  the 
majority,  and  separated  from  the  head,  could  lawfully  claim  to 
act  under  that  commission  ;  nor  could  any  individual,  (as  Lu- 
ther, or  Calvin,)  or  voluntary  association  (e.  g.  the  English 
church,  or  our  own,)  reasonably  arrogate  to  itself  the  power  of 
performing  the  functions  of  that  commissioned  tribunal,"  — 
which  is  "regularly  commissioned,  (in  St.  Peter,)  and  also 
regularly  perpetuated,'"  (in  the  Romish  hierarchical  succession.) 
That  we  are  bound  to  worship  God  in  this  special  manner,  is, 
we  are  told,  one  of  the  first  principles  of  the  church,*  of  which 
church,  "  the  innumerable  separatists  that  have  gone  out  from 
the  great  body,"  can  be  no  part." 

You  thus  perceive,  my  brethren,  by  another  illustration,  the 
great  practical  importance  which  attaches  to  a  proper  under- 
standing of  the  subject  in  whose  investigation  we  are  engaged. 
These  claims  to  universal  spiritual  "  dominion  over  our  faith," 
and  of  "  lordship  over  God's  heritage,"  and  "  to  be  called  mas- 
ters on  earth  "  —  and  to  hold  the  keys  of  death,  hell,  and  heav- 
en,—  are   rested  upon  the   doctrine  of  a  lineal   succession  of 

1)  Pastoral  Letter,  &c.  p.  5,  Bait,  ties  of  Jesus  Christ.  In  fact,  the 
1840.  catholic  church  in  all  past  ages,  has 

2)  Ibid,  p.  11.  not  been  more  jealous  of  the  sacred 

3)  See  p.  12.  deposite  of  orthodox  doctrine,  than   of 

4)  P.  21.  the   equally  sacred  deposites  of /eo'z'^i- 

5)  Dr  Milner  thus  states  the  doc-  mate  ordination,  by  bishops  who  them- 
trine,  (End  of  Controv.  Letter  xxix.  selves  had  been  rightly  ordained  and 
p  177,  Pliilad.  Ed.)  "  In  viewing  </(e  consecmted,  and  oi'  valid  jurisdiction, 
apostolical  tree,  you  are  to  consider  it  or  divine  missioti,  by  which  she  au- 
as  representing  an  uninterrupted  sue-  thorizes  her  ministers  to  exercise 
cession  of  pontiffs  and  prelates,  who  their  respective  functions  in  such  and 
derive  not  barelv  their  doctrine,  but  such  places,  with  respect  to  such  and 
also  in  a  special  manner,  tiieir  Tniwis-  such  persons,  and  under  such  ana 
try,  namely,  their  holy  orders,  and  the  such  conditions,  as  she  by  the  deposi- 
ri^ht  or  jurisdiction  to  exercise  those  taries  of  this  jurisdiction  is  pleased  to 
orders  in  a  right  line,  from  the  apos-  ordain."  See  also  Letter  xxx.  ibid. 


232  THIS   VISIBLE    ONLY   TO   THE   FAITHFUL.  [lECT.    X. 

prelates,  terminating  in  Christ,  and  to  whom  are  given  in  per- 
petuity, the  promises  and  gifts  of  heaven.  From  this  claim, 
the  Romish  hierarchy  excludes  the  English  ;  and  the  English, 
the  Romish,  both  in  England  and  in  this  country;  as  having  for- 
feited by  invalidity  or  separation,  the  privilege  of  ordination  — 
while  both  agree  in  severing  from  all  semblance  of  pretence  to 
any  right  in  this  inheritance,  the  remaining  mass  of  protestant 
and  reformed  Christendom. 

Now  this  claim  we  have  already  largely  considered.  We 
have  heard,  from  these  prelates  themselves,  the  rules  by  which, 
in  forming  a  judgment  on  this  subject,  we  should  be  guided,  and 
the  tests  to  which  they  would  have  it  brought,  and  which,  very 
plainly,  never  can  be  possibly  met.  We  have  also  examined  it  by 
the  test  of  scripture,  and  of  historical  fact,  and  are  we  not  justified 
in  saying,  that  it  has  been  fairly  pronounced,  Tekel  ?  This  claim 
to  supernatural  and  exclusive  authority  wants  only  one  thing  — 
(for  there  is  no  lack  of  bold  and  confident  averment,)  and  that 
one  thing  is, — it  is  without  any  credentials  whatever,  either  orig- 
inal or  delegated,  —  either  in  the  record  of  scripture,  or  in  the 
record  of  history  —  either  in  the  book  of  divine  Providence,  or 
of  man's  foresight  and  industry.  Not  that  such  credentials  are 
unpretended.  They  are,  on  the  contrary,  loudly  boasted  as  in 
the  hands  of  all  their  clergy,  and  evident  to  every  one  who  will 
duly  examine.  But  then  the  volume  which  contains  them,  as 
well  scripture  as  history,  must,  we  are  told,  be  "  read,  as  it  lies 
open  in  the  hands  of  the  church,  under  the  guidance  of  her  eye, 
and  with  the  support  of  her  testimony.'"  She  must  be  arbitress 
of  her  own  claims  ;  interpret  for  herself  the  laws  ;  examine  the 
witnesses  ;  and  pronounce  the  verdict,  without  a  jury,  by  her 
own  authority.  For  if,  in  the  exercise  of  self-willed  obstina- 
cy, we  will  attempt  to  come  to  any  decision  for  ourselves ;  and, 
instead  of  yielding  to  her  authority,^  "  snatch  the  testimony  out 
of  her  hands,  and  run  ivith  it  into  a  corner,"  these  evidences, 
wisely  withdrawn,  in  just  judgment,  from  our  perception,  will 
"  vanish  from  the  word  of  God,  and  from  the  written  page  "  of 
history.' 

That,  in  fact,  this  is  true,  we  have  personal  experience  to 
attest.  For,  as  we  have  profanely  ventured  on  this  investi- 
gation, not  under  the  church's  eye  or  rule,  we  have  in  vain 
searched  for  the  evidences  of  a  "  regularly  perpetuated  tribu- 
nal"  of  prelatic  functionaries  "of  the  first  order,"  with  exclu- 
sive possession  of  divine  gifts,  —  in  the  word  of  God,  or  in  the 

1)  Palmer,  vol.  ii.  Oxford  Tracts,  2)    Lond.    Quart.    Rev.   March, 

vol.  i.  1840,  p.  274. 

3)  Ibid. 


LECT,  X.]    NO  VESTIGE  OF  PETER  OR  HIS  SUCCESSORS  AT  ROME.  233 

page  of  history.  We  have  sought  for  Peter  at  Rome,  and  we 
could  not  ascertain  whether  he  was  ever  in  Rome  at  all.  We 
have  diligently  inquired  after  his  episcopal  residence,  and  were 
thoroughly  satisfied  that  Peter  never  was  bishop  of  Rome.  We 
then  sought  for  his  successor  in  office,  but  could  not  be  even 
satisfied  as  to  the  fact,  whether  he  ever  ordained  a  successor  at 
all,  or,  if  he  did,  who  that  successor  was.  And  when  we  at- 
tempted to  trace  this  line  through  its  successive  links,  we  were 
plunged  into  unfathomable  darkness,  and  while  depending  on  its 
assistance,  found  it  broken  and  disrupted  at  every  turn.  There 
is  no  such  thing  to  be  found  or  proved.  It  is  a  nonentity,  or 
existent  only  in  the  implicit  faith,  or  the  imagination,  of  its 
vain  pretenders.' 

"  He  must  have  optics  sharp,  I  ween, 
Who  sees  what  is  not  to  be  seen." 

This  conclusion  will  be  strengthened,  if  we  bring  this  doc- 
trine, in  the  next  place,  to  the  test  of  facts. 

Since,  as  these  writers  teach,  it  should  be  our  "  chief  care  and 
study  to  maintain  the  unity  which  was  delivered  by  our  Lord 
and  his  apostles  to  (ihe  prelates)  his  successors, "i  is  it,  we  ask, 
a  fact,  that  these  prelates  are  the  successors  of  the  apostles,  not 
in  the  sense  of  succeeding  them  in  time,  but  of  inheriting  their 
office,  their  jurisdiction,  and  their  plenitude  of  grace  and  gifts? 
This,  Cyprian^  and  Firmilian,  we  believe,  first  distinctly  affirm- 
ed.' This  title  the  hierarchy  has  ever  since  monopolized,  like 
the  Roman  patricians,  who,  by  the  establishment  of  hereditary 
names,  devised  an  easy  and  certain  distinction,  and  thus  secured 
to  themselves  the  idea  of  a  iierediiary  nobility.  But  is  there, 
in  all  this  confident  assumption,  any  thing  more  than  the  name  ? 
We  answer  —  it  is  vox  et  prceterea  nihil. 

Prelates  are  not,  as  we  affirm,  successors  even  to  the  name  of 
apostles.  Its  adoption  by  them,  is  an  usurpation.  It  is  the  hol- 
low pretext  of  an  upstart  family,  who  would  conceal  their  own 
novelty,  in  the  mystery  or  antiquity  of  some  more  noble  name. 
■^  We  will  approve  our  claim,"  says  Bishop  Onderdonk,  "  by  the 
test  of  scripture."  And  how  does  he  prove  it?  "  It  was,"  says  he, 
"  AFTKR  THE  APOSTOLIC  AGE,  that  the  name  bishop  was  taken 
FROM  (he  second  order,  and  appropriated  to  the  first,  as  we  learn 
from  Theodoret,  one  of  the  fathers,"* — who  wrote  in  the  fifth  cen- 

1)  See  Letters  of  the  Martyrs,  p.  3)  Though  not  to  the  exclusion 
93.                                                                     of  presbyters.     See  Ausgusti's  Antiq. 

"  The  Pope  of  Rome,"  says  Bishop  of  the  Ch.  by  Coleman,  p.  100,  et 
Hoo|)er,  "  is  neither  head  nor  member  alike,  and  Dr.  Willet,  Syn.  Pap.  pp. 
of  the   church,  but  a  very  enemy,  as      274,  ti7.5. 

the  word  of  God,  and  all  ancient  wri-  4)  Wks.  on  Episcop.  p.  42. 

ters  do  record." 

2)  Cyprian,     principio      Epist. 
zzxiii. 

30 


234   PRELATES  NOT  SUCCESSORS  TO  THE  TITLE  OF  APOSTLES.   [LECT.  X. 

tury  ! !     "  Tliey  thought  it  not  decent,"  says  Ambrose,  "  to  as- 
sume to  themselves  the  name  of  apostles.'" 

Now  from  this  very  evidence,  thus  adduced  by  our  opponents, 
it  is,  we  think,  clearly  manifest,  in  the  first  place,  that  this  name 
was  not  given  to  bishops,  either  by  Christ  or  by  his  apostles  ;  for 
Ambrose  distinctly  says,  "  the  holy  apostles  being  dead,  they 
that  were  ordained  after  them,"  were  thus  denominated.  "Those 
now  called  bishops  (i.  e.  in  the  fifth  century)  were  then  (i.  e. 
anciently)  called  apostles."  So  teaches  Theodoret.  This  title 
of  apostles,  as  applied  to  bishops,  is  of  ancient,  but  it  is  not  of 
apostolic  origin.  It  was  given,  not  while  the  apostles  lived,  but 
after  they  were  dead.  It  is,  therefore,  human,  and  not  divine. 
Secondly,  it  is  apparent,  from  these  very  writers,  that  anciently, 
presbyters  were  called  bishops,  and  that  they  were,  in  truth,  bish- 
ops ;  for  thus  Theodoret  says  expressly,  that  "  the  same  persons 
were  anciently  called  promiscuously  both  bishops  and  presby- 
ters." Even  in  ancient  times,  which  were,  of  course,  subse- 
quent to  apostolic  times,  the  titles  of  bishop  and  presbyter  were 
promiscuously  applied  "  to  the  same  persons." 


1)  See  in  Bingham's  Works, 
vol.  i. 

The  following  is  Ihe  testimony  of 
Theodoret  and  Ambrose,  as  it  is 
presented  by  Mr.  Bingham,  fEccl. 
Antiq.  vol.  i.  p.  50,  Lond.,  1834  ) 
"  The  same  persons  were  anciently 
called  promiscuously,  (Theodoret, 
Comment,  in  Phil.  i.  1.)  both  bishops 
and  presbyters,  whilst  those  who  are 
now  called  bishops,  were  called  apos- 
tles. But  shortly  after,  the  name  of 
apostles  was  appropriated  to  such  only 
as  were  apostles  indeed  ;  and  then  the 
name,  bishop,  was  given  to  those,  who 
were  before  called  apostles." 

"  The  author  asserts  the  same 
thing,"  (Ambrose,  Comm.  in  Eph  iv. 
Amalarius.de  Offic.  Eccl  lib.  ii.  c.  13,) 
"  that  ALL  BISHOPS  were  called  apos- 
tles at  first.  They  who  are  now  call- 
ed bishops  were  originally  called  apos- 
tles ;  but  the  holy  apostles  being 
dead,  they  who  were  ordained  after 
them  to  govern  the  churches,  could 
not  arrive  to  the  excellency  of  those 
first ;  nor  had  they  the  testimony  of 
miracles,  but  were  in  ma.nv  other 
respects  inferior  to  them.  Therefore 
they  thought  it  not  decent  to  assume 
to  themselves  the  name  of  apostles  ; 
but  dividing  the  names,  they  left  to 
presbyters  the  name  of  the  presbytery, 
and  they  themselves  were  called 
bishops." 


"  Theodoret  observes,  they  (ths 
bishops)  were  called  apostles,  till  in 
process  of  time,  for  distinction's  sake, 
the  name  of  apostle  came  only  to  be 
given  to  the  apostles,  especially  so 
called."  (Oaubeny's  Guide  to  the 
Ch.  app.  vol.  ii.  p.  (33,  Lond.  1604  ) 
This  writer  also  speaks  of"  the  reser- 
vation of  the  apostolic  title,  by  the 
general  consent  of  the  primitive 
church,  to  the  blessed  twelve."  Ibid, 
p.  (i4. 

Hear  also  Dr  Hook  :  "  The  officer 
whom  we  now  call  a  bishop,  was  at 
first  called  an  apos^tle,  though  atter- 
wards  it  was  thought  bettek  to  con- 
fine the  title  of  apostle  to  those  who 

HAD     SEEN     THE    LoRD    JzSL'S,     while 

their  successors,  exercising  the  same 
rights  and  authority,  though  unen- 
dowed with  miraculous  powers,  con- 
tented THEMSELVES  WITH  the  DE- 
SIGNATION OF  BISHOPS."  Two  Ser- 
mons on  the  Church. 

Now  if  we  altogether  reject  the  au- 
thority of  Theodoret  in  a  matter  of 
such  importance  as  the  present,  will 
not  Dr.  Bowden  himself  sanction  its 
repudiation,  since  "  it  rests  the  point 
contended  for  upon  incompetent  evi- 
dence,—  upon  a  single  evidence.'" 
Wks.  on  Episcop.  vol.  i.  p.  154. 


LECT.  X.]      IT    IS    NOT    DECENT    TO    CALL    PRELATES    APOSTLES.  235 

Thirdly,  it  appears  from  these  writers,  that  the  persons  called 
bishops  in  the  fifth  century,  differed  essentially  from  those  called 
bishops  "anciently,"  or  "after  the  apostles  were  dead." 
"  Those  now  called  bishops,  (in  the  fifth  century,)  were  (an- 
ciently) called  apostles."  Either,  therefore,  presbyters,  bishops, 
and  apostles,  were  titles  which,  in  ancient  times,  were  promis- 
cuously given  "  to  the  same  persons,"  or  otherwise,  the  ancient 
order  of  apostles  was  distinct  and  different  from  the  order  of 
bishops  in  the  fifth  century. 

And  lastly,  it  is  most  clear,  from  these  writers,  that  the  pre- 
lates of  the  fifth  century  were  a  new  order  of  ministers  —  for 
they  were  not  "  truly  apostles."  "  Shortly  after,  the  name  of 
apostles  was  appropriated,"  says  Theodoret,  "  to  such  only  as 
were  apostles  indeed,  and  then  the  name  bishop  was  given  to 
those  who  were  {then)  called  apostles,"  (but  were  not  apos- 
tles indeed.)  That  is,  the  prelates  usurped  to  themselves  the 
exclusive  use  of  the  title  of  bishop,  until  "  in  process  of  time," 
under  the  lordly  Cyprian  and  his  baronial  successors,  the  name, 
style,  authority,  prerogatives,  and  powers,  of  the  "  true  apostles  " 
were  arrogantly  assumed  by  those  who  "  say  they  are  apostles 
and  are  not."  For  any  order  of  men  now  to  appropriate  to 
themselves  such  a  title,  and  thus  lord  it  over  the  true  bishops  of 
Christ's  church,  is,  to  use  the  language  of  Ambrose,  and  to  speak 
of  it  in  the  very  mildest  terms,  "  not  decent."  It  was  deemed 
immodest  in  ancient  times,  and  it  is  certainly  not  warranted 
by  God's  word. 

On  this  subject  prelatists  are  completely  posed.  Their 
mouths  are  shut,  by  their  own  rule  of  the  previous  question, 
with  which  they  are  ever  attempting  to  silence  the  arguments  of 
presbyterians.  We  now  demand,  who  withdrew  the  title  of 
apostles  from  the  order  of  bishops  —  supposing  it  to  have  been 
continued  ?  By  whose  authority  was  the  title  of  bishop  —  which 
was  given  to  presbyters  by  the  Holy  Ghost  and  divine  scripture, 
— taken  from  them  and  appropriated  to  prelates?  Name  the  time 
—  the  causes  —  the  authors  —  within  the  first  three  centuries, 
or  on  their  own  principles,  let  prelatists  ever  after  hold  their 
peace.  Alas  !  alas  !  all  that  can  be  said  is,  "  it  (i.  e.  the  title, 
bishop)  probably  continued  to  be  given  to  the  immediate  suc- 
cessors of  the  apostles,  till  about  the  close  of  the  first  century, 
when  the  appellative  bishop  was  appropriated  to  them."^ 

Bishops  are  not,  then,  the  successors  of  the  apostles  in  the 
titular  use  of  that  phrase.  There  is  not  a  particle  of  authority, 
either  from  scripture  or  ecclesiastical  antiquity,  to  prove   that 

1)  WkB.  on  Episcop.  vol.  ii.  p.  123. 


236  THE    ANCIENT    USE    OF    THE    TERM    APOSTLE.  [lECT.  X. 

modern  bishops  are  really  apostles,  or  exclusively  their  succes- 
sors. In  its  strict  and  appropriate  nieaiiint^,  the  term  apostle  is 
confined  to  the  chosen  twelve.  They  are  called  "  the  twelve," 
and  "the  apostlks  of  Christ,"  (1  Cor.  i.  1,  2  Cor.  i.  1, 
and  II,  13,  &c.  That  such  was  the  proper  meaning  of  the 
term,  as  used  in  scripture,  is  the  opinion  of  Eusebius.  "  The 
Lord  Jesus  Chriiit  called  twelve  apostles,"  says  he,'  "  whom 
alone,  amongst  the  rest  of  his  disciples,  he  denominated  with 
peculiar  honor,  his  apostles."  When  not  used  in  this  appropri- 
ated sense,  as  applicable  only  to  "  the  twelve,"  this  title  was 
given  to  ministers  generally,  including  presbyters. 

"  Many  were  called  apostles  by  way  of  imitation.'"^  Such  are 
the  words  of  Eusebius ;  an  earlier  and  better  authority  on  such 
subjects  than  Theodoret  or  Ambrose.  So  he  calls  "  Thaddeus, 
one  of  the  seventy,"  an  apostle.^  The  learned  Valesius's  note  on 
the  place  is  as  follows  :  —  "  Apostle  here  is  to  be  taken  in  a  large 
sense.  After  the  same  manner  every  nation  and  city  termed  them 
apostles,  from  whom  they  first  received  the  truth  of  the  gospel. 
This  name  was  not  only  given  to  the  twelve,  but  all  their 
DISCIPLES,  COMPANIONS  and  assistants,  were  generally  call- 
ed apostles."  They  all  acted  as  missionaries  in  spreading  the 
gospel.  The  word  apostle  means  a  missionary.  See,  then, 
the  goodly  company  of  apostles !  Indeed,  Suicer  shows  that 
WOMEN,  as  well  as  men,  were  sometimes  called  apostles  by 
ecclesiastical  writers;  and  that  the  Emperor  Constantine,  and 
Helen,  were  both  frequently  called,  by  ecclesiastical  writers, 
iffci%oaroKoi,  apostolic  compeers."*  So  St.  Augustin  says,  "that, 
generally,"  in  his  time,  "it  was  applied  to  such  as  were  intro- 
duced into  the  ministry."  He  divides  apostles  into  four  classes, 
and  says  the  third  sort  who  were  called  apostles  in  his  day,  were 
such  as  were  smuggled  into  the  priesthood  by  popular  favor, — 
^'favore  vulgi  in  sacerdotium  subrogati."'  Jerome  is  plainer 
still.  He  makes  the  same  division  of  apostles  into  four  classes. 
In  the  first,  he  places  Isaiah,  the  other  prophets,  and  St.  Paul: 
in  the  second,  Joshua  the  son  of  Nun  ;  the  third  he  states  to  be, 
"when  any  one  is  ordained  by  the  favor  and  request  of  men; 
as  we  now,"  says  he,  "see  many,  not  according  to  the  will  of 
God,  but  by  bribing  the  favor  of  the  multitude,  become  smuggled 
into  the  priesthood."®  Here  it  is  plain,  from  the  testimony  of 
these  great  men,  earlier  and  better  authorities  than  Theodoret, 

1)  Eccl.  Hist.  lib.  i.  cap.  10.  5)  August.   Opp.  torn.  iv.  app.  p. 

2)  Eccl.  Hist.  lib.  i.  c.  xii.     In      9,  ed.  Sugd.  1G64. 

Powell,  pp.  44,  45.  6)  Hicronymi.  Comment,  in  £p. 

3)  Euseb.  E.  Hist.  1.  L.  c.  12.  ad  Galat.  lib.  i.  cap.  1. 

4)  Suiceri  Theeaur.  i.  477, 1459. 


LECT.  X.]       UIFFERENT    MEANINGS    OF    THE    TERM    APOSTLE,  237 

that,  in  their  days,  any  priest,  all  priests,  even  the  worst  of 
priests  or  presbyters,  were  commonly  denominated  apostles. 
Grotius  shows,  that  the  emperors  Honorius  and  Arcadius,  in 
their  laws,  called  the  Jewish  presbyters,  apostles.'  Tertullian 
expressly  calls  the  seventy  disciples,  apostles;*  though  Bishop 
Taylor  declares  that  they  were  only  presbyters.  Chrysostom 
and  Theophylact,  also,  are  nientioned  by  Estius,  (on  1  Cor.  xv. 
7.)  as  applying  the  term  apostle  to  the  seventy  ;  so  also  Erasmus 
and  Calvin,  on  the  same  place. 

Ignatius,  also,  expressly  applies  the  term  apostle  to  pres- 
byters. 

*'  Presbyters  preside  in  the  place  of  the  council  of  the 
apostles  :  " —  "  Be  ye  subject  to  your  presbyters  as  to  the  apostles 
of  Jesus  Christ:  "  —  "Let  all  reverence  the  presbyters  as  the 
Sanhedrim  of  God,  and  as  the  college  of  apostles  :  "  —  "  See 
that  ye  follow  the  presbyters  as  the  apostles. "3 

Ignatius  calls  this  council  of  the  presbyters  "the  Sanhedrim 
of  God  —  the  council  of  the  apostles  —  the  college  of  the 
apostles." 

On  this  subject  we  will  add  the  following  remarks  from  a 
standard  work  : 

"  It  is  well  known,  that  the  term  apostle,"  has,  in  the  New 
Testament,  a  peculiar  or  appropriated,  and  a  common  significa- 
tion ;  and  that  its  peculiar  application  is  to  that  chosen  band  of 
men,  who  were  endowed  and  sent,  in  an  extraordinary  manner, 
by  Christ  himself.  Of  the  peculiar  or  restricted  application  of 
this  title,  we  need  not  select  specific  examples.  They  are  nu- 
merous, and  well  known.  In  this  high  and  exclusive  sense,  we 
are  expressly  told,  it  was  confined  to  those  who  had  *  seen  the 
Lord,'  and  who  were  '  witnesses  of  his  sufferings  and  his  res- 
urrection.' In  this  sense  it  was  applied  to  the  twelve,  and 
afterwards  to  Matthias,  who  was  chosen  to  take  the  place  of 
Judas,  '  who,  by  transgression,  fell.'  And  in  the  same  specific 
meaning  of  the  title,  Paul  was  an  apostle,  who  was  made  to 
'see  the  Lord  '  in  a  miraculous  manner,  and  who  was  chosen 
to  be  a  witness  unto  all  men,  of  what  he  had  seen  and  heard." 
Let  any  impartial  man,  who  doubts  whether  this  is  the  mean- 
ing of  the  title  apostle,  in  its  primary  and  pre-eminent  sense,  as 
applied  to  those  on  whom  our  Lord  himself  bestowed  it,  let  him 
read  the  following  scriptures,  and  he  will  no  longer  doubt. 
Matth.  X.   1—6;   Luke  vi.  12—17;  Acts  i.   21,  22;  Luke 

1)  Grotii  Annot.  in  Poli.  Syn.  iv.  3)  Powell  on  Ap.  Sure.  pp.  44-46. 
!■  280.  4)  Bib.  Repertory,  1835,  pp.  252. 

2)  Tertull.     adversus    Marcion,     532. 
1.  iv.  cap.  24. 


238  DIFFERENT    MEANINGS    OF    THE    TERM    APOSTLE.       [lECT.  X 

xxiv.  48;  Acts  xxii.  14,  15;  Acts  xxiii.  11  ;  Acts  xvi.  16; 
together  with  many  oilier  parallel  passages,  which  will  readily 
occur  to  all  who  are  familiar  with  the  Bible.  But  the  term 
apostle,  uTto^To'Kog,  is  also  sometimes  applied,  in  the  New 
Testament,  to  men  who  were  not  thus  immediately  com- 
niissioDcd,  by  Christ,  in  an  extraordinary  manner,  to  be  "  wit- 
nesses of  his  sufferings  and  his  resurrection,"  but  who  were  sim- 
ply messen2;ers,  sent  on  particular  occasions  to  perform  a  certain 
service.  This  distinction  between  the  official,  and  the  lax  or 
general  sense  of  this  term,  the  learned  translators  of  our  Eng- 
lish Bible,  though  themselves  zealous  episcopalians,  seldom  fail 
to  recognize.  Tluis  Paul,  in  writing  to  the  Phillippians,  (ii.  25,) 
says, — "  I  suppose  it  necessary  to  send  unto  you  Epaphroditus, 
my  brother  and  companion  in  labor,  but  your  messenger,  upiwv 
5f  axofTToAov,  and  he  tiiat  ministered  to  my  wants."  Epaphro- 
ditus had  been  sent,  by  the  Phillipj)ians,  as  a  messenger,  or  bear- 
er of  their  bounty  to  Paul.  This  we  learn,  not  only  from  the 
passage  just  quoted,  but  also  from  chapter  iv.  18,  of  the  same 
epistle.  Accordingly,  he  is  styled  "  their  messenger."  Sure- 
ly, it  would  be  preposterous  to  consider  the  original  word  as 
importing  that  he  was  an  apostle  in  the  official  sense  of  that 
term.  Again,  the  same  apostle,  in  designating  certain  brethren, 
sent  with  Titus  to  bear  the  church's  bounty  to  Jerusalem, 
speaks  of  them  thus: — "  Whether  any  do  inquire  of  Titus,  he 
is  my  partner  and  fellow-helper  concerning  you  :  or  our  breth- 
ren be  inquired  of,  they  are  the  messengers,  wKoarohoi,  of  the 
churches,  and  the  glory  of  Christ."  Here  the  very  same  rule 
of  interpretation  applies,  and  accordingly  so  judged  the  pious 
translators  of  our  Bible ;  and,  therefore,  they  rendered  the  word 
messengers,  not  "  apostles."' 

1)  With   this    representation    of  ed    apostles,    as   before   I    showed  in 

the  apostolic  office,  Dr.    Barrow,  of  Ignatius.      And    St.     Cyprian     thus 

famous     memory     in     the     English  writeth ;    '  Me  nullius  suadela  potest, 

church,  entirely  agrees.     (See  Wks.  inclinare  ;'  that   is,  no  man  can  per- 

vol.  i.  p.  5'J8,  fol.  ed.)  suade  me  that  there  are  now  other 

Similar,  also,    is   the   judgment  of  apostles,"  &c. 

Dr.  Willet,  a  very  eminent  episcopal  "  The  term  apostle,"  says  Mr.  Pow- 

divine.  in   a   work  of  extraordinary  ell,    (Ap.  Succ.  p.  37,)  "  is  also  ap- 

Jearning    and    research.      He     here  plied  in  the  New  Testament  to  several 

shows   that  this  was   the    opinion  of  other  individuals  in  a  more   general 

Cyprian    and     Ignatius,  two    of  the  and  less  dignified  sense.     Itis,  inthis 

fathers,  who  are  most  highly  regarded  sense,  applied   to  designate  all    who 

by  these  prelatical  divines.     "  While  were  sent  to  preach  the  gospel  ;  the 

the  apostles  remained,"    (Dr.  Willet,  twelve  apostles,  and  all  other  preach- 

Syn.  Pap.  pp.  274,  275,)  "  the  calling  ers.     This  is  proved  by  the  following 

of  bishops  is  not  thought  then  to  have  passages:  Matt,  xxiii.  34,  compared 

been  so  necessary  as  afterwards  ;  but  with  Luke  xi.  49.  tor  the  apostles,   as 

yet,  after  the  apostles  were  departed,  mentioned  in  Luke,  are  explained  in 

the  ancient  bishopa  refused  to  be  call-  Matthew  by  being  called  '  wise  men 


LECT.  X.]  PRELATES  DO  NOT  SUCCEED  APOSTLES  IN  THEIR  CALL.   239 

As  prelates  are  thus  shown  not  to  be  successors  to  the  apos- 
tles in  name,  we  proceed  to  show  that  they  are  not  their  suc- 
cessors in  their  call.  The  apostles  were  summoned  to  their 
work  by  an  immediate  divine  call,  received  from  Christ  and 
God.  They  were  neither  called  of  men,  nor  by  men  ;  (Gal.  i. 
12;)  and  they  were  inducted  into  their  office  without  any  impo- 
sition of  hands,  and  without  passing  through  any  subordinate 
grades  or  orders  in  the  ministry.  This  is  true  of  every  one  of 
the  apostles,  and  was  essential  to  their  character,  and  an  inte- 
gral and  important  part  of  that  evidence  by  which  they  dis- 
played the  signs  of  an  apostle.  This  call  the  apostles  are  most 
careful  to  assert  and  maintain  as  the  alone  ground  of  their 
assumed  power  and  authority  in  the  churches. 

"  To  the  office  of  an  apostle,"  says  Dr.  Barrow,  "  it  was  requi- 
site that  the  person  should  have  an  immediate  designation  and 
commission  from  God  ;  such  as  St.  Paul  so  often  doth  insist 
upon  for  asserting  his  title  to  this  office, — Paul  an  apostle,  not 
from  men  or  by  man.'"  "  Not  by  men,"  saith  St.  Chrysostom, 
"this  is  the  property  of  the  apostles." 

Now  it  is  one  of  those  points  on  which  we  and  our  oppo- 
nents are  agreed,  that  no  such  immediate  and  extraordinary 
call  to  the  ministry  is  to  be  expected  in  this  age  of  the  churcli, 
and  is  only  pretended  to,  by  vain,  enthusiastic,  and  fanatical 
visionaries.^  Most  evident  it  is,  therefore,  that  prelates  are  not 
successors  of  the  apostles  in  their  calling,  as  they  are  not 
successors  to  their  title. 

Neither  are  prelates  successors  of  the  apostles,  in  the  pos- 
session of  those  insignia  by  which  their  high  calling  was  exhib- 
ited to  the  world.  An  extraordinary  call  from  heaven  has  ever 
been  accompanied  by  some  extraordinary  sign;  —  some  gift, 
power,  or  supernatuial  influence, — by  which,  as  a  seal,  heaven's 
sanction  was  impressed  upon  its  possessor.  Thus  it  was  wiih 
Moses  ;  with  the  prophets  ;    with  John  the  Baptist ;  with  the 

and  scribes ; '  that  is,  all  tenchers  or  sages  to  mean  all  preachers  of  the 
preaciiers  of  the  gospel.  So  Dr.  Ham-  gospel  ;  and,  indeed,  they  do  not  seem 
mond,  in  Matt,  xxiii.  34  :  '  Prophets  capable  of  any  other  interpretation. 
and  others  learned  in  your  religion,  Jn  this  sense,  several  of  the  fathers 
which,  receiving  the  faith,  (Matt.  call  tlie  seventy  disciples,  sent  forth 
xiii.  .52.)  sliall  preach  it  to  you  ;'  and,  by  our  Lord  to  prearli  the  gospel, 
therefore,  (in  Luke  xi.  49,)  he  trans-  apostles.  Apollos,  who  was  nothing 
lates  the  word  '  apostle  '  by  the  word  more  than  a  lay  preacher,  is  also  in 
'messenger;'  and  so  Tremellius  this  sense  called  an  'apostle.'  Corn- 
translates  the  Syriac  there.  Dr.  Whit-  pare  1  Cor.  iv  9,  with  v  6  ;  so  is  Bar- 
by.  in  Matt,  xxiii.  34,  explains  '  wise  nabas,  Acts  xiv.  14  ;  and  see  2  Cor. 
men  and  scribes.'  by  '  true  interpret-  xi.  13,  with  v.  l.'j.  Rem.  xvi.  7  ;  Rev. 
ers  of  the  law  and  the  prophets,'  and  ii.  2."  See  also  Note  A. 
instances  Stephen  the  deacon  as  one  1)  See  ut  supra, 
of  them.  Thus  Calvin,  Mr.  S.Clark,  2)  See  the  Divine  Right  of  the 
and  Dr.  A.  Clark,  interpret  these  pas-  Ministry,  pp.  115, 119,  4to.  1654. 


240  PRELATES    HAVE    NOT    THE    INSIGNIA    OF    APOSTLES.    [lECT.  X. 

seventy  disciples,  and  with  the  twelve  apostles.  "  Truly," 
says  Paid,  "  the  signs  of  an  apostle  were  wrought  among  you 
in  all  patience,  in  signs  and  wo'ders  and  mighty  deeds,"  (2  Cor. 
xii.  \'2,  Acts  viii.  14 — 19,  and  xix.  G,  and  I  Tim.  i.  6.)  By 
this  test  do  we  put  to  silence  the  boasting  pride  of  all  impos- 
tors, whether  fanatical  or  prelatical,  whether  Anabaptist,  Rom- 
ish, or  Anglican.  Show  us  the  signs  of  an  apostle,  ye  that 
claiuj  the  honor  ;  or  else  let  it  be  known  of  all  men,  that  the 
Lord  sent  you  not  as  apostles,  neither  has  he  commanded  you, 
nor  has  he  spoken  unto  you. 

Now  that  we  reasonably  demand  apostolic  evidence,  where 
there  is  claimed  apostolic  power  and  office;  and  the  supernatu- 
ral gifts,  where  the  indwelling  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  apostolic 
measure  is  assumed,  has  been  already  proved  :  and  the  pre- 
tensions and  lying  wonders  of  the  Romish  hierarchy  in  all  ages, 
will  alone  demonstrably  testify.'  *'  That  this  office,"  says  Arch- 
bishop VVhateley,  "  the  binding  and  loosing  in  respect  of  things 
essential,"  (e.g.  prelatical  ordination  for  effic  icious  administration 
of  the  sacraments)  "can  be  left  in  the  hands  of  none  but  inspired 
men,  all  must  allow  ;  and  we  should  add,  in  the  hands  of  men, 
who,  like  the  apostles,  give  proof  of  their  inspiration  and  pru- 
dence, the  credentials  of  their  divine  commission,  by  working 
sensible  miracles."* 

The  authority  of  the  apostles  can  only  co-exist  with  those 
supernatural  endowments  by  which  it  was  supported:  and  when 
those  extraordinary  evidences  were  no  longer  necessary  for  the 
establishment  of  the  christian  church,  that  extraordinary  author- 
ity terminated  ;  and  the  apostolic  office  ceased  with  its  apostolic 
functionaries,  who  were  the  only  "true  apostles."'* 

It  is  most  foolishly  pretended,  by  way  of  objection  to  this 
conclusion,  that  the  apostolic  authority  was  separate  from  those 
apostolic  endowments,  whereby  it  was  sealed  and  evidenced  j 
because,  it  is  said,  the  apostles  received  their  commission  first, 
and  these  gifts  afterwards,  at  the  day  of  Pentecost.''      But,  be- 

1)  Sec  Lect.  iv. p. 76,  and  Hough's  is  the  authority  by  which  alone  any 
Reply  to  Dr.  Wiseman,  ])p.  53,  54.  true  minister  of  Jesus  Christ  can  act. 

2)  Whateley  on  Origin  of  Rom-  'We  hold,  then,  that  the  commission 
ish  Errors,  p.  173.  See  also  Proles-  continues  as  the  cliarter  of  the  church, 
Bor  Powell's  Tradition  Unveiled.  but  that  the   extraordinary  gifts  and 

3)  See  O.xf  Tr.  vol.  i.  p.  234.  qualifications  of  the  apostles,   having 

4)  See  ibid,  p.  232.  terminated  upon   themselves,  the  au- 
"  It  was  the  commission,"  sa3's  Dr.       thority    consequent    upon    them,   has 

Bowden,  (Wks.  on  Episcop.  vol.  i.  p.  also    ceased    with    the    necessity,    for 

142,)  "  that  gave  the  apostles  their /jrt-  which  alone  they  were  given.     (See 

mary  in   the   church,  and    not   their  ibid,  p.  144,  and  the  author's  amazing 

qualifications."     But  that  commission  confusion  of  ideas.) 
manifestly  gives  no  primacy  whatev-  Besides,    Dr.    Bowden    himself  al- 

er,  but  was  given  to  the  church,  and  lows,  that  the  extraordinary  authority 


LBCT   X.]         PRELATES    HAVE    NO    APOSTOLICAL   ENDOWMENTS.  241 

sides  the  glaring  contradiction  here  given  to  the  vaunted  claims 
of  these  prelates,  founded  on  their  previous  commission,  as 
given  to  the  twelve,  during  our  Lord's  ministry  ;  at  which  time 
they  were  certainly  endowed  with  these  very  miraculous  gifts  ; 
our  Lord,  when  he,  as  we  affirm,  for  the  first  time  truly  com- 
missioned the  apostles,  and  pledged  such  supernatural  gifts,  re- 
stricted them  from  exercising  their  function  — and  charged  them 
to  wait  at  Jerusalem  until  these  gifts  were  actually  bestowed. 
They  were,  therefore,  practically  and  fully  commissioned  as 
apostles,  only  when  internally  gifted  with  these  heavenly  inspi- 
rations, and  preternatural  endowments.  Then,  alone,  could 
they  feel  assured  of  their  divine  call  themselves — and  then 
only,  could  they  attest  their  divine  mission  unto  others. 

This  objection  leads,  then,  to  a  double  absurdity.  It  involves 
its  authors  in  self-contradiction.  It  denies  a  main  pillar  in  their 
hierarchical  argument,  and  practically  refutes  all  claims  to  the 
existence  of  prelates  during  our  Lord's  ministry.  It  also  separ- 
ates and  disjoins  what  the  Lord  made  inseparable,  the  commis- 
sion and  the  endowments  of  the  apostles.  The  commission 
was  indeed  given  separately  and  apart  from  any  miraculous 
effusion  ;  because  it  is  the  permanent  basis  upon  which  the  min- 
isterial office  was  to  rest  in  every  age,  whereas  miraculous 
powers  were  soon  to  be  withdrawn.  But  as  the  apostles  were 
selected  for  the  special  and  glorious  work  of  being  master- 
builders  in  laying  the  foundation  of  the  christian  church,  an 
additional  promise  of  the  bestowment  of  corresponding  endow- 
ments to  them  was  annexed  to  the  commission,  and  for  these 
they  were  required  to  wait,  before  venturing  to  undertake  their 
all-important  work.  These  grfts,  therefore,  were  the  necessary 
evidences  to  themselves  and  to  others,  of  iheir  actual  invest- 
ment with  this  apostolical  office.  Already,  it  is  allowed,  they 
had  received  a  commission  as  ministers,  just  as  all  ministers  have, 
who  act  under  the  same  authority.  But  then  only  were  they 
inaugurated  into  the  office  and  duties  of  the  apostleship,  when 
empowered  for  its  discharge  by  these  heavenly  and  divine 
gifts. 

and  calling  of  the  apostles  was  in  su-  with  them  ;  but  it  was  not  by  virtue 

peraddition  to  this  commission.  "Still  of  this  commission.     In  like  manner, 

further,"   (Wks  on  Episcnp   vol.  i.  p.  I  do  not  see  how  it  could  have  been 

174,)  says  he,  "  I  do  not  see  how  this  that  St.  Paul  acted  in  consequence  of 

commission  could  have  been  tint,  by  this  commission,  when  he  was  called 

virtue    of  which    Matthias    acted    as  to  the  apostolate  in  a  wonderful  man- 

an    apostle.     He    was    called   to     the  ner ;  and   some  time  after  this  com- 

aposlolate  in  a  different  manner  from  mission  was  given  to  the  other  apos- 

the  other  apostles    To  be  sure,  he  was  ties." 
called  to  the  exercise  of  equal  power 

31 


242  NO    SUCCESSION    IN    THE    OFFICE    OF    APOSTLES.  [LECT.  X. 

Now  are  modern  prelates  prepared  to  exhibit  these  royal 
insignia  of  their  exalted  office  ?  Claiming  the  authority,  can 
they  show  the  signs  of  true  apostles  ?  Besides  that  com- 
mission, which  vests  authority  to  preach  in  all  who  are  truly 
called  of  God  to  minister  in  his  name,  can  they  point  to  any 
other  investment  with  any  supernatural  gifts,  and  by  which 
they  are  instated  in  the  office  of  the  apostolaie  ?  To  these 
they  must  either  pretend,  as  do  Romanists,  and  thus  expose 
themselves,  as  they  have  done,  to  the  derision  of  the  wise  ;  or 
to  these  they  must  offer  no  pretensions,  as  indeed  they  do  not, 
and  thus  vacate  their  "  episcopal  thrones,"  and  acknowledge 
the  imposition  of  their  assumed  order. 

Pi  elates,  therefore,  are  not  successors  of  the  apostles  in  their 
name,  in  their  call,  or  in  their  gifts.  We  further  affirm,  that 
they  are  not  their  successors  in  office.  The  apostles,  in  the 
office  to  which  they  were  extraordinarily  called,  and  by  virtue 
of  which,  they  were  denominated,  the  apostles  of  the 
Lord,  could  not  have,  and  never  did  have,  any  successors.^ 

The  apostolic  office  not  being  instituted  by  the  apostles,  but 
received  by  them  immediately  from  Christ,  could  not  be  trans- 
mitted by  them,  without  a  continued,  immediate,  and  supernat- 
ural influence,  exercised  by  Christ,  upon  each  incumbent  of  it. 
Their  office,  therefore,  could  form  no  part  of  the  apostolic 
model  of  church  government. 

The  extraordinary  powers  exercised  by  the  apostles  over  the 
bishops,  or  presbyters  of  the  churches,  is  no  warrant  for  a  con- 
tinued order  of  apostles.  "  The  circumstance,  then,"  says  Dr. 
Bowden,^  "  of  bishops  being  obliged  to  submit  to  the  instruc- 
tions and  directions  of  the  apostles,  was  of  an  extraordinary 
nature,  springing  out  of  the  state  of  things,  and,  therefore,  ceas- 
ing with  that  state."* 

1)  See  this  reasoning  fully  sns-  the  execution  of  it;  commanding- 
tained  by  Palmer  on  the  Church,  vol.  them  to  convert  all  nations  to  his  re- 
i.  pp.  ICO,  170.  ligion,  to  administer   the  sacraments 

2)  Wks.  on  Episcop.  vol.  ii.  pp.  to  them,  and  to  teach  them  all  things 
131,137.  that  he  had  commanded  them.  Under 

3)  Thus  Bp.  Beveridge  teaches,  which  is  contained  whatsoever  is  nec- 
that  whatever  in  the  apostles  was  ex-  essary  to  the  instruction  and  govern- 
traordinary  was  by  way  of  favor  and  ment  of  his  church  in  all  ages;  asr 
privilege  conferred  on  the  persons  of  the  ordaining  persons  to  do  it,  censur- 
theapostles,(Wks.vol.  ii.p.88  )  "But  ing  those  who  refuse  instruction,  com- 
thc  office  properly  apostolical,  consist-  forting  and  encouraging  those  who 
ed  only  in  such  things  as  had  an  im-  receive  it,  and  the  like.  This  was 
mediate  reference  to  the  propagating,  properly  the  office  apostolical,  which, 
edifying,  and  governing  of  the  church  thereiore,  was  not  to  die  with  the  per- 
in  all  ages.  Indeed, our  Saviour  him-  sons  of  the  apostles,  but  was  to  be 
self  gives  the  apostle  a  particular  de-  transmitted  by  them  to  all  after  ages, 
scription  of  their  office,  in  the  very  as  our  Lord  himself  intimates  in  the 
commiBsion  he  here  grants  them  for  very  description  of  it." 


LECT.  X.]  NO    SUCCESSION    IN    THE    OFFICE    OF    APOSTLES.  215 

That  the  apostles  did  not  feel  competent  to  appoint  success- 
ors to  themselves  in  their  apostolic  office,  is  evident  from  the 
manner  in  which  they  proceeded  to  fill  the  vacated  aposiolateof 
Judas.  "  When  Judas,"  says  the  Rev.  Mr.  Gordon,'  "  who 
had  been  numbered  among  the  twelve,  and  had  obtained  a  part 
of  their  ministry,  had  gone  to  his  place,  they  do  not,  in  virtue 
of  any  powers  they  had  received,  presume  to  fill  up  this  vacan- 
cy ;  but  nominate  two  of  those  men,  '  that  had  conspired 
with  them  all  the  time  that  the  Lord  Jesus  went  out  and  in 
among  them,  beginning  from  the  baptism  of  John,  unto  the 
same  day  that  Jesus  was  taken  up  from  them,  to  be  ordained 
witnesses  with  them  of  his  resurrection,'  and  appeal  to  heaven 
for  a  decision;  'and  they  prayed  and  said,  Thou  Lord,  who 
knowest  the  hearts  of  all  men,  show  whether  of  these  men  thou 
hast  chosen,  that  he  may  take  part  of  this  ministry  and  apostle- 
ship,  from  which  Judas,  by  transgression,  fell  ;  and  they  gave 
forth  their  lots,  and  the  lot  fell  upon  Matthias,  and  he  was  num- 
bered with  the  apostles.'  In  further  proof  and  illustration  of 
this,  we  find,  that  Barnabas  and  Saul  being  marked  out  for  this 
office,  they  receive  their  appointment  by  immediate  nomination 
from  heaven.  'Separate  me  Barnabas  and  Saul,  for  tlie  work 
unto  which  I  have  designed  them.'  Thus  it  is  evident,  that 
the  work  of  apostleship  was  not  to  be  the  effect  of  the  most 
perfect  human  wisdom  or  determination.  The  apostles,  there- 
fore, neither  had.  nor  could  have  had,  any  successors,  by  a  de- 
signation of  their  own.  They  attempt  no  such  thing,  nor  is 
any  succession,  in  this  channel,  to  be  looked  for."* 

1)  Inquiry  into  Powers  of  Eccle-  succession,  in  gradum  or  in  caput, 
siastics,  £dinb.  ]d07,  p.  12.  as  tlie  jurists  distinguish.     In  gradum 

2)  See  the  argument  forcibly  pre-  eundem.  as  when  one  brother  dying, 
sented  in  Campbell's  Lect  on  another  brother  doth  succeed  him  in 
Eccl.  Hist.  lect.  V.  p.  83,  ed.  3d.  the  inheritance.  In  caput,  as  when 
'•  Fourthly  and  lastly,"  says  he,  (pp.  one  not  of  the  same  degree  and  line 
84,  85,  88,)  "  as  a  full  proof  that  the  doth  come  after  another,  as  when  a 
matter  was  thus  universally  under-  brother  dying  another  doth  inherit 
stood,  both  in  their  own  age,  and  in  after  him,  not  a  brother  but  a  cousin 
the  times  immediately  succeeding,  no  to  him.  Thus  tlie  apostles  have  no 
one,  on  the  death  of  an  apostle,  was  successors  succeeding  them  in  gra- 
ever  substituted  in  his  room,  and  when  dum,  but  such  only  as  follow  them, 
that  original  sacred  college  was  es-  being  of  other  degrees,  and  in  anoth- 
tinct,  the  title  became  extinct  with  it.  er  line,  as  it  were,  in  which  sort  ev- 
The  election  of  Matthias  by  the  apos-  ery  pastor  doth  succeed  them.  But, 
ties,  in  the  room  of  Judas,  is  no  excep-  then,  they  are  said  to  succeed  them, 
lion,  as  it  was  previous  to  their  enter-  because  they  follow  them,  and  alter  a 
ing  on  their  charge."  sort  resemble  them,  not  because  they 

"  Thirdly,  I  sav,  (Bayne's  Diocesan  hold  the  places  which  the  apostles  did 

Tryall,  p.  52,)  that  Christ  never  did  properly.      Apostolo  in    quantum    est 

ordaia  that  any   should  succeed    the  .Apostolus  nonmcceeditur.  Lrgnto  qua- 

apostles  or  the  seventy-two,  in  regard  tenus  est  Ltgatus  non  succeeditur." 
of   their  order.     There   is   a   double 


244  NO    SUCCESSION    IN    THE    OFFICK    OF    APOSTLES.  [lECT.  X. 

But,  further,  "  if  the  apostles  did  commit  some  ordinary 
power  of  government  to  some  men,  above  others,  in  which  re- 
gard they  should  be  their  successors,  then  the  apostles  did  not 
only  enjoy,  as  legates,  power  over  the  churches,  but  as  ordinary 
ministers.  For  what  power  they  enjoyed  as  legates,  this  they 
could  not  aliis  legare.  Power,  as  ordinary  pastors,  in  any 
nations  or  churches,  they  never  reserved,  and,  therefore,  did 
never  substitute  others  to  themselves,  in  that  which  they  never 
exercised  nor  enjoyed.  And  it  is  to  be  noted,  that  this  opinion 
of  episcopal  succession,  from  the  apostles,  is  grounded  on  this, 
that  the  apostles  were  not  only  apostles,  but  bishops  in  provin- 
ces and  particular  churches.  For  the  papists  themselves  urged 
with  this,  that  the  apostles  have  none  succeeding  them,  they 
do  consider  a  double  respect  in  the  apostles,  the  one  of  legates. 
So  Peter,  nor  any  other  could  have  a  successor,  the  other  of 
bishops  oecumenical  in  Peter,  of  bishops  national  or  diocesan, 
as  in  some  other.  Thus  only  considered,  they  grant  them  to 
have  other  bishops  succeeding  them  :  for  the  apostolic  power, 
precisely  considered,  wns  privilegmm  personaJe  simul  cum  per- 
sona extinctum.  Now  we  have  proved  that  this  ground  is  false, 
and,  therefore,  that  succeeding  the  apostles,  more  appropriate  to 
bishops,  than  other  ministers  grounded  upon  it,  is  false  also.'"* 

In  their  ordinary  character,  what  were  the  apostles,  but  minis- 
ters of  Christ  —  stewards  of  the  mysteries  of  God  —  presbyters  of 
the  flock  ?  —  And,  as  such,  all  true,  and  faithful  ministers  of 
Christ's  word,  are,  as  St.  Jerome  asserts,  apostles,  and  succes- 
sors of  the  apostles.^  It  is  remarkable  that  the  apostles  are 
never  once  called,  in  the  New  Testament,  bishops — while 
they  are  there  denominated  presbyters  —  as  if  for  the  very  pur- 
pose of  putting  to  shame  this  unblushing  arrogance  of  men. 

The  office  of  an  apostle  was  two-fold.  He  was  a  witness  of 
Christ,  and  he  was  also  a  minister  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  As  a 
witness  he  was  invested,  by  Christ  himself,  with  the  power  of 
working  miracles.  As  a  minister  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  he  was 
endued  with  extraordinary  spiritual  endowments.  In  both  ca- 
pacities, the  office  was,  in  the  very  nature  of  things,  inderiva- 
ble,  and  terminable  upon  the  persons  of  the  original  incumbents.^ 
This  is  not  less  true  of  Matthias  and  Paul,  than  of  the  other 
chosen  apostles. ■»  The  assertion  that  the  apostles  derived  their 
authority  from  some  mysterious  "  grace  of  the  apostleship," 
and  which  was  to  be  "  transmitted  along  the  line  of  those  whom 

1)  Baynes'  Diocesan  Tryall,  p.               3)  See  Hind's  Rise  and  Progress 
52.  of  Christ,  vol.  i.  pp.  149,  154,  201. 

2)  See  also  Potter  on  Ch.  Gov.  4)  See  Hind's  Rise  and  Progress, 
p.  117.  &c.  vol.  i.  pp.  185, 1S7,  254,  and  Oxf. 

Tr.  vol.  i.  p.  162. 


LECT.   X.]  NO    SUCCESSION    IN    THii    OFFICE    OF    APOSTLES.  245 

they  ordained,  and  so  handed  down  to  those  who  come  after 
them,'"  is  in  flat  contradiction  to  the  testimony  of  St.  Paul, 
who  ultimately  tested  his  claims,  and  prevailed  over  his  jealous 
rivals,  by  the  assertion  and  the  exercise  of  his  superior  miracu- 
lous powers.*  And,  while  it  is  true,  that  these  powers  were 
possessed  even  by  some  not  apostles,  yet,  in  every  such  case,  it 
was  through  the  gift  of  the  apostles,  and  in  confirmation  of  their 
supreme  apostolic  power.^  Such  then  being  the  mode  in  which 
exclusively,  miraculous  powers  were  conveyed,  the  result  must 
have  been,  that  when  all  the  apostles  had  terminated  their 
course  on  earth,  all  the  channels  must  have  been  stopped, 
through  which  this  stream  hitherto  flowed  ;  and  as  the  last  gen- 
eration dropped  off",  one  by  one,  of  such  as  had  been  thus  gift- 
ed, this  extraordinary  manifestation  of  the  Spirit  gradually  be- 
came extinct.* 

The  only  end  for  which  the  apostles  were  thus  chosen  as 
witnesses,  and  thus  endowed  as  inspired  teachers,  and  thus  gift- 
ed with  supernatural  authority,  legislative,  executive,  and  judi- 
cial, was,  that  they  might  lay  the  foundation  of  the  christian 
church.  They,  while  living,  were  to  the  churches,  what  their 
inspired  writings  are  to  us,  they  being  now  dead.  But,  as  there 
is  but  one  foundation  on  which  the  church  rests,  so  was  it  at  once 
and  but  once,  laid  —  and  that  is  the  doctrine  taught  by  these 
apostles  and  prophets,  Jesus  Christ  himself  being  the  chief  cor- 
ner-stone. —  And  since  there  can  be  no  other  foundation  laid, 
but  that  is  laid,  nor  any  reconstruction  or  alteration  made  there- 
in ;  so  is  it  certain  that  there  can  be  no  successors  to  the  apos- 
tles in  this,  their  high  and  holy  office." 

To  make,  therefore,  the  church  now  rest  its  authority  upon 
its  being  able  to  exhibit  true  successors  of  the  apostles,  is  to 
shift  it  from  the  rock  of  ages,  and  to  build  it  upon  the  sand. 
"The  space  between  heaven  and  earth  doth  not  more  exceed 
the  distance  from  the  utmost  ends  of  the  world,"  than  do  such 
false  apostles  stand  divided  from  the  true.® 

But  we  will  not  longer  delay  in  arguing  a  point,  which  has 
been  made  to  appear  so  incontrovertibly  plain,  by  so  many  able 

1)  Oxf.  Tr.  vol.  i.  pp.  162,  164.         fol.  vol.  i  b.  iii.  ch.  viii.  p.  418,  &c. 

2)  Hinds,  as  above,  p.  254,  note,  6)  See  Jackson,  as  above 

and  Oxf.  Tr.  vol.  i.  p.  164.  Speaking  of  the   most   famous  re- 

3)  See  this  shown  by  Archbishop  formers  and  divines,  Bishop  Dave- 
Whaleley  in  his  Essays  on  DifBc.  in  nant,  in  his  Adhortatia  ad  pacem  ec- 
St.  Paul's  Writings,  p.  306.  clesia?,  p.  73,  says,  "  eosque  non  sus- 

4)  Ibid,  p.  307.  piciamus  tanquam  prophetas  el  apos- 

5)  See  an  argument  on  this  point  tolos,  St^vytuf-icvc,  sed  estimamus  vi- 
against  the  papists  in  Jackson's  Wks.  ros  bonos,"  &.c. 


246  PRELATES    ARE    NOT    THE    SUCCESSORS  [lECT  X. 

and  impartial  writers.  "  This  office,"  says  Dr.  Barrow,  "  was 
not  designed  to  continue  by  derivation  ;  for  it  contained  in  it 
divers  things,  which,  apparently,  were  not  communicated,  and 
which  no  man  (or  succession  of  men)  could,  without  gross  im- 
posture and  hypocrisy,  challenge  to  himself.'"  The  presump- 
tion of  still  claiming  apostles,  which  the  primitive  church  ventur- 
ed not  to  indulge,  it  was  left  for  their  unapostolical  successors, 
with  all  boldness  and  effrontery,  to  exhibit;  and  to  require  implicit 
faith  in  such  an  order,  on  pain  of  excommimication,  deposition, 
and  the  brand  of  heresy.*  '•'  For  these  reasons,"  say  the  West- 
minster assembly  of  divines,  after  giving  eight  distinct  argu- 
ments, with  scripture  proofs,  in  support  of  our  position,  "  and 
because  there  is  no  office  in  the  church  that  can  resemble  this, 
and  because  there  is  no  promise  in  scripture  for  their  continu- 
ance, we  concluded  that  the  apostleship  was  only  for  a  time,  and 
extraordinary.'" 

Bellarmine  also,  the  great  fountain  authority  of  the  Romish 
church,  allows  that  these  three  things  are  necessary  to  con- 
stitute an  apostle.'*  "  First,  that  he  be  immediately  called  of 
God,  and  inspired  to  write  scripture :  the  second,  to  be  a  found- 
er of  the  churches  where  none  were  before  :  thirdly,  that  he 
have  authority  over  the  whole  church.  The  first  (saith  he) 
agreeth  not  with  the  pope,  but  the  other  two  do  :  for  by  the 
pope  many  churches  have  been  planted,  and  he  hath  authority 
over  the  whole  church,  as  Peter's  successor,"  he. 

Thus  is  it  apparent,  upon  the  showing  of  this  cardinal,  who 
was  himself  a  candidate  for  the  popedom,  that  the  pope  of 
Rome,  the  apostle  of  all  apostles,  is  destitute  of  any  thing  like 
a  clear  and  valid  title  to  the  true  office  of  the  apostleship.  And 
if  this  is  so  evident  as  it  regards  the  source  of  the  entire  prelati- 
cal  succession  of  the  English  and  American  prelacy,  how  much 
more  certainly  evident  is  it,  of  those  weak  and  diluted  streams 
which  have  issued  from  it. 

We  proceed,  however,  to  remark,  that  prelates  are  not  now, 
and  that  they  cannot  be,  successors  of  the  apostles,  as  it  regards 
their  laborious  duties. 

The    commission    of  the    apostles    extended   to  the   whole 

1)    Similar   is   the   judgment  of  Repertory,    1835,   p.  253;    Bowera's 

Bishop    Hoadley  and    Mr.    Dodwell.  Popes,  vol.  i.  pp.  5,  6. 
See  Dr.  Miller  on  the  Min.  pp.  59, 60.  2)  See  PoUer  on  Ch.  Gov.  pp. 

See  also  Parry  on  Inspiration,  p.  66.  177,  165,  166. 

Hinds'  Rise  and   Progress,  vol.  ii.  pp.  3)  See  in  Lightfoot's  Wks.  vol. 

70,79,80,87;  Hinds  on  Inspiration,  xiii.  p.  27. 

p.    117;  Lightfoot's   Wks.   vol.   xiii.  4)  Willet,    Syn.    Pap.    p.    165. 

pp.  26,  27,  30,  70,  98,  99,  103,  105,  Bellann.    cap.   12,    reap,  ad    object. 

Ill;  Calvin's  Institutes,  vol.  ii.  pp.  2  nili. 
230,  236,  306,   bond.   ed. ;    Biblical 


LECT.  I.]  TO    THE   APOSTLES    IN    THEIR    DUTIES.  247 

world.  (Matt,  xxviii  19;  Mark  xvi.  15.)  They  infallibly 
delivered  to  the  churches  the  doctrines  that  are  to  be  received, 
believed  and  taught.  (John  xvi.  13,  and  xiv.  26;  1  Cor.  i.  18; 
Rev.  xxii.  14;  and  Eph.  ii.  20.)  They  had  power  to  give  tiie 
Holy  Ghost.  (Acts  viii.  18,  and  xix.  6.)  They  were  appoint- 
ed to  go  through  the  world  to  settle  churches,  in  that  new  form 
whicli  was  instituted  by  Christ.  (^1  Cor.  xi.  23  ;  Malt,  xxviii. 
19,  20.) 

"  I  must  say,"  says  Dr.  Owen,  "  if  there  be  any  who  pre- 
tend to  be  the  successors  of  the  apostles,  as  to  the  extent  of 
their  office-power  unto  all  nations  ;  notwithstanding  whatever 
they  may  pretend  of  such  an  agreement  to  take  up  with  a  por- 
tion, accommodated  unto  their  case  and  interest,  whilst  so  many 
nations  of  the  earth  lie  unattempted  as  to  the  preaching  of  the 
gospel,  they  will,  one  day,  be  found  transgressors  of  their  own 
profession,  and  will  be  dealt  with  accordingly." 

"  There  were  apostles,"  says  Dr.  Pusey,  "to  whom  Jesus 
Christ  himself  had  given  authority,  and  the  whole  world  as 
their  diocese,  and  field  of  their  labors."' 

"  An  apostle,"  says  Chrysostom,  "  is  charged  with  the  in- 
struction, not  of  any  particular  nation  or  city,  but  of  the  whole 
w'orld  ;  but  a  bishop  (prelate)  must  reside  and  be  employed  in 
one  place. "2  The  very  reason  which  is  assigned  by  Irenaeus, 
and  Ruffinus,  for  the  appointment,  at  Rome,  of  a  bishop,  was, 
that  the  apostles  might  be  at  leisure  to  discharge  the  duties  of 
the  apostolical  office.'  That  the  apostolic  office  was  essential- 
ly missionary  in  its  character,  and  in  its  labors,  is  very  eloquent- 
ly urged  by  a  present  American  prelate.* 

JNow,  even  supposing  (than  which  no  supposition  could  be 
made  more  contrary  to  their  whole  history,)  that  these  prelati- 
cal  inheritors  of  the  plenitude  of  episcopal  authority,""  had 
any  conception  of  such  a  work,  or  any  disposition  to  attempt  its 
fulfilment;  the  work  itself  is  rendered  plainly  impossible  by  the 
very  fact,  that  a  large  portion  of  the  earth  has  been  pre-occu- 
pied  by  prelatical  claimants  to  priority  of  possession  ;   and  it  is 

1)  The  Church  the  Converter  of  4)  See  "  The  Apostolical  Com- 
the  Heathen.  Sermon  second,  page  missim,  the  Missionary  Charter  of 
sixth,  Oxford,  1839  the  Church,"  by  Bishop  Doane.  pp. 

2)  Bower's  History  of  the  Popes,  6,10,11.12,14,17.  See  also  Hooker's 
page  6;  Chrysostom's  works,  volume  Ecclesiastical  Polity,  book  third,  sec- 
eighth,  page  11.5,  Benedictine  edition.  tion  77. 

3)  RufBnus  in  Prsefatione  ad  5)  See  Archbishop  Potter  on  the 
Clement.  Recognit.  Irenseus  in  Euse-  Government  of  the  Church,  Ameri- 
bio,  caput  5,  6  ;  Bower's   History   of  can  edition,  page  183. 

the  Popes,  volume  first,  page  5. 


248  PRELATES    ARE    NOT   THE    SUCCESSORS  [lECT.  X. 

contrary  to  all  ecclesiastical  rule  for  one  prelate  to  intrude  with- 
in the  diocese  of  another;  or  for  one  branch  of  the  church  to 
interfere  with  any  other  branch.'  And  thus  it  has  come  to  pass, 
that  opprobrium  and'  disgrace,  nay,  open  charges  of  crimi- 
naHty  and  wrong-doing,  have  been  thundered  forth  from  within 
this  very  church  of  the  successionists,  against  all  modern  fanati- 
cism, and  schismaiical  unrighteousness,  in  the  shape  of  mission- 
ary labors. 

For  the  last  thousand  years  at  least,  until  of  late,  there  have 
probably  been  very  few  prelates  in  the  entire  succession,  who  have, 
in  any  measure,  manner,  or  spirit,  thus  proved  themselves  to  be 
apostolical,  or  successors  of  the  apostles.  "In  vain,"  therefore, 
to  use  the  words  of  Bishop  Doane,  "  ye  trace  the  date  of  your 
commission  back  to  Galilee.  In  vain  ye  prove,  by  warrant 
clear,  and  open,  and  enduring  as  the  stars  in  heaven,  the  au- 
thority by  which  you  act,  as  ministers  of  Christ.  Only  while 
you  go  and  make  disciples  of  all  nations,  does  Jesus  promise  to 
be  with  his  apostles  and  their  successors  unto  the  end  of  the 
world."  "  The  promises  made  to  the  apostles  were  made  to 
them  as  missionaries  to  all  nations,  as  teachers  every  where,  and 
the  office  cannot  be  held  without  the  commission,  nor  the  prom- 
ise claimed  without  the  work."* 

Now,  guided  by  these  principles,  where  are  we  to  find  a  suc- 
cession of  prelates  who  have  truly  filled  the  office,  or  really 
enjoyed  the  promise,  made  to  the  successors  of  the  apostles  ? 
Stillingfleet  incontrovertibly  proves,  in  his  Antiquities  of  the 
British  Churches,  from  Sozomen*  and  others,  as  it  regards  the 
church  of  Rome,  that  its  prelates,  so  far  from  being  mis- 
sionaries, did  not  even  preach  at  Rome.  For  when  Sozo- 
men  wrote,  "  there  was  no  preaching  in  that  church  ;  neither  by 
the  bishop  nor  by  any  one  else."*  So  it  was  also  in  the  Arme- 
nian churches,  which  used  their  prelates  for  little  else  than  to 
give  orders,  as  the  same  author  learnedly  demonstrates.*  To 
how  great  an  extent  this  was  true  of  the  prelates  universally, 
during  many  ages,  it  is  unnecessary  in  this  place  to  show.* 

"  The  bishops,"  says  Dr.  McCrie,  in  his  review  of  the  state 

1)  Potter,  p.  182,1839  Binorham's  Antiq.  vol.  i.  p.  64,  and 

2)  Palmer  on   the  Church,  vol.       vol.  v.  p.  86,  &c. 

i.  et  passim.     Sermon,  as  above,  pp,  In  Ireland,  prior  to    the   reforma- 

12,10.6.  tion,      "preaching    constituted     no 

3)  L.  7.  c.  9.  part  of  the   clerical  office."     Reid's 

4)  Fol.  ed.  Lond.  1685,  pp.  22.9,  lliat.  Presb.  Church  in  Ireland,  vol, 
230.  i.  18. 

5)  Ibid,  p.  231.  Another  evidence   of  this   popish 

6)  No  bishop   preached  at  Rome  tendency   of  the  system  is  the  fact, 
for  five  hundred  years  together.     See  that  while  it  was  mainly  established 


LECT.  X.] 


OF  THE  APOSTLES  IN  PREACHING. 


S49 


of  religion  at  the  time  of  the  reformation,'  "  never,  on  any  oc- 
casion, condescended  to  preach  ;  indeed,  I  scarcely  recollect  an 
instance  of  it,  mentioned  in  history,  from  the  erection  of  the 
regidar  Scottish  episcopacy,  down  to  tlie  era  of  the  reforma- 
tion. The  practice  had  even  gone  into  desuetude  among  all 
the  secular  clergy,  and  was  wholly  devolved  on  the  mendicant 
monks,  who  employed  it  for  the  most  mercenary  purposes."  Of 
the  truth  of  this  statement  many  ludicious  illustrations  are  given 
ill  the  course  of  this  author's  incomparable  history  of  the  Scot- 
tish reformer. 

Such  a  state  of  things  may  appear  to  us  incredible.  But 
wherever  this  doctrine  of  prelatic  apostolical  succession  has  been 
established,  such  results  have  ensued.*  In  England  it  has  been 
even  argued  that  preaching  was  no  necessary  part  of  prelatical 
duty.  And  that  the  decline  of  preaching,  and  its  subordination 
to  forms,  ceremonies,  and  order,  will  inevitably  follow  the  exten- 
sion of  this  system  in  this  country,  is  certain  from  the  following 
statement : 

"  The  spirit  which  brings  these  (i.  e.  ceremonies)  up,  is  at 
the  same  time  disposed  to  muzzle  the  pulpit.^     We  have  it  from 


by  Elizabeth,  so  were  her  tendencies 
and  partialities  stronjily  toward  Ro- 
manism. "  She  was,"  says  Dr.  Price, 
(Hist.  Prot.  Nonconf  vol.  i.  p.  441,) 
"  strongly  attached  to  some  of  the 
most  obn  ixious  dogmas  and  rites  of 
the  Romish  church, and  on  more  than 
one  occasion  threatened  her  bisliops 
with  a  reinstatement  of  the  ancient 
faith.  Warmly  opposed  to  an  increase 
of  preaching  ministers,  she  contended 
with  singular  inconsistency,  that  it 
was  good  for  the  church  to  have  but 
few,  and  that  three  or  four  were 
enough  for  a  county." 

On  this  tendency  of  this  prelatic 
system,  to  undervalue  and  thus  to 
destroy  preaching,  see  Bp.  Meade's 
Sermon  at  the  Consecration  of  Bp. 
Elliot,  Wasliington,  1840,  pp.  7,  8, 
ifcc. 

1)  Life  of  Knox,  vol.  i.  p.  16, 
.5th  ed. 

2)  It  is  one  prominent  object  of 
the  Oxford  Iractators  to  depreciate 
the  importance  of  preaching  in  com- 
parison with  prayers   and  ceremonies. 

The  f  llovving  is  from  the  remains 
of  the  Rev.  Richard  Huzzel  Froude, 
he  great  doctor  of  the  Oxford  holy 
catholic  church  :  "  If,"  says  he,  to  a 
correspondent,  "  you  are  determined 
c  have  a  pulpit  in  your  church,  rc/tich 

32 


/  would  much  rather  be  withnut,  do  put 
it  at  the  west  end  of  the  church,  or 
leave  it  where  it  is  ;  every  one  can 
hear  you  perfectly,  and  what  can  they 
want  more.?  Rut  whatever  you  do, 
pray  don't  let  it  stand  in  the  light  of 
the  altar,  which,  if  there  is  any  truth 
in  my  notions  of  ordination,  is  more 
sacred  than  the  Holy  of  Holies  was  in 
the  Jewish  temple."  This  hiilrrd  of 
pulpits  and  preaching  is  characteristic 
of  the  party  ;  the  performance  of  cere- 
monies, and  the  reading  of  prayers  at 
the  altar,  they  would  fain  have  to 
supersede  the  preaching  of  the  word. 
In  a  work  recommended  by  the 
house  of  American  bishops,  (Dau- 
beny's  Guide  to  the  Ch.  vol.  i.  p.  202,) 
it  is  declared,  "  To  which  we  will  add, 
that  a  man  may  hear  sermons  all  his 
life-time,  and  yet  be  as  far  from 
heaven  at  the  end  of  his  stage,  as 
when  he  set  out;  but  let  him  pray  the 
prayers  of  our  church,  and  devoutly 
attend  her  sacraments,  and  we  may 
venture  to  answer  for  his  salvation, 
though  he  should  have  been  so  circum- 
stanced as  not  to  have  iieard  a  single 
sermon  during  his  whole  christian 
progress." 

■X)  Taken  from  the  (Philadel- 
phia) Episcopal  Recorder,  for  Febru- 
ary, 1841. 


250  PRELACY    AND    PREACHING    DISCORDANT.  [lECT.  X. 

undoubted  authority,  that  in  one  of  our  churches,  not  far  distant, 
where  there  are  generally  three  ininisters  present  every  Sunday, 
and  where  there  is  a  peculiar  love  for  the  Oxford  innovations, 
the  people  have  assembled  as  much  as  two  or  three  Sundays  in 
succession,  without  a  sermon;  some  remarks  upon  the  collect  of 
the  day,  or  upon  some  ordinance  or  custom,  taking  the  place. 
This  is  the  high  road  to  Rome.  When  ceiemonies  are  lifted  up 
and  preaching  is  put  down,  we  are  not  far  from  a  condition  vvl)ich 
will  ask  for  another  reformation." 

These  prelates  are  not  successors  of  the  apostles,  for  they 
have  voided  the  only  commission  under  which  the  apostles  acted, 
and  have  framed  one  of  their  own  devising.  The  duty  of  min- 
isters, as  we  are  now  taught,  is  to  "preach  the  church  "  —  to 
"  preach  the  sacraments"  —  to  administer  the  holy  rite  of  bap- 
tism —  and  to  offer  up  the  sacrifice  of  the  eucharist.  But  where 
in  all  the  Bible,  have  high-churchmen  discovered  this  comniis- 
sion  of  the  christian  ministry?  "  Apostles  had  it  not,  and  Christ 
never  gave  it." 

"  He  gave,"  to  use  the  forcible  words  of  the  eloquent  Caroline 
Fry,  in  her  recent  exposure  of  the  popery  of  this  system,'  "  an 
express  commission  to  administer  baptism,  and  an  inferential 
one  to  administer  as  well  as  to  receive,  the  Lord's  supper.  '  But 
go  thou,  and  preach  the  kingdom  of  God.'  '  Preach  the  word.' 
'Preach  the  gospel.'  'Preach  Jesus  Christ — Christ  cruci- 
fied.' It  is  written  of  our  Lord  and  his  apostles,  that  they 
preached  many  things  as  pertaining  to  the  gospel,  righteousness, 
peace,  repentance,  remission  of  sins,  resurrection  from  the  dead  ; 
—  of  John  the  Baptist  only  it  is  written,  that  he  preached  the 
baptisvi  of  repentance.  John  was  a  minister  of  the  law,  not  of 
the  gospel.  If  this  change  of  words  in  the  ministerial  commis- 
sion means  nothing,  why  not  adhere  to  the  language  of  Holy 
Writ  ?  But  it  does  mean  something,  and  the  words  are  better 
suited  to  the  meaning  than  you  perhaps  are  aware.  It  is  intended 
in  their  preaching,  to  put  the  church  and  the  sacraments  in  the 
place  of  Christ,  and  preach  salvation  by  them,  rather  than  by 
him;  inviting  us  to  worship  them  instead  of  himself.  We  can- 
not charge  this  language  with  disguise,  but  we  may  well  say  to 
them  that  use  it,  '  Thy  speech  bewrayeth  thee.'" 

The  description  given,  by  Bishop  Doane,  of  the  work  and  du- 
ties of  an  apostle,  and  of  every  true  successor  of  the  apostles,  is 
a  sentence  of  exclusion,  by  which  invalidity  and  gracelessness 
are  justly  charged  upon  the  whole  line  of  the  succession.  Pre- 
lates may  well  doff  their  jewelled  mitres ;  unrobe  them  of  their 

1)  The  Listener  at  Oxford,  pp.  129, 130.    See  Note  B. 


LECT.  X.]   THE  APOSTLES  AS  SUCH  HAD  NO  SCCCESSOKS.        251 

sacerdotal  ermine  ;  and  silence  their  loud  and  clamorous  boast- 
ing ;  since  it  is  thus  evident,  whether  we  test  them  by  apostolic 
name,  gills,  office,  or  labors,  that  their  order  is  not  derived  from 
Christ,  or  from  his  apostles.  It  contains  nothing  resembling  ihe 
apostolic  msiitute,  as  such.  They  have  no  characteristic  of  the 
first  apostles  in  their  apostolic  character.  Tliey  have,  on  the 
contrary,  full  many  of  them  been  characterized  by  every  thing 
that  is  in  violent  contrariety  to  that  character.  Which  of  the 
offices  of  the  apostles  do  prelates  perform,  or  even  pretend  to 
perform,'  and  on  what  principle  can  they  affirm  that  "the office 
of  an  apostle  was  that  which  the  Saviour  instituted,  and  which 
it  was  his  last  act  here  on  earth,  to  invest  with  authority,  and 
shall  never  cease  ?  "^ 

Now,  whether  the  apostles,  as  such  and  in  their  proper  charac- 
ter, had  successors,  and  whether  prelates  are  these  successors,  is, 
according  to  Dr.  Chapman,^  "  the  very  hinge  on  which  turns  the 
whole  controversy  between  the  dissenters  and  the  church.  If 
such  an  acknowledgment  did  actually  exist,  the  sheet-anchor  of 
episcopacy  would  be  irretrievably  lost,  and  the  ship  itself  dashed 
into  innumerable  fragments," 

That  modern  prelates  do,  therefore,  occupy  the  office  —  that 
they  are  clothed  with  the  authority  —  and  endowed  with  the 
character  and  grace  of  the  apostles,  is  most  unhesitatingly  affirm- 
ed, as  by  others,  so  by  Archbishop  Laud,  Bishops  Stilii.igHeet. 
Hicks,  Honieman,  Beveridge,  and  Hall,  and  by  the  Rev. 
Messrs.  Nichols,  Leslie,  Law,  and  others.* 

On  the  other  hand,  that  the  apostles  had  properly  no  succes- 
sors in  their  appropriate  and  apostolic  office,  may  be  shown  to 
have  been  the  opinion  of  very  eminent  men. 

The  Romish  church,  of  course,  denies  this  succession  to  all 
the  apostles  except  Peter,  and  to  all  others  than  the  bishops  of 
Rome,  and  such  as  have  been  ordained  by  them. 

Espenceus  shows,  from  Chrysostom,  that  there  is  a  treble  dif- 
ference between  an  apostle  and  a  bishop.*  "  A  bishop  is  called 
by  man,  is  set  over  a  certaine  place,  he  is  not  always  ceriaine 
that  bee  hath  the  spirit.  But  an  apostle  is  immediately  called  of 
God,  (Gal.  i.  I,)  he  is  sent  to  preach  not  to  any  one  place,  but  to 
all  churches,  (as  1.  Tim.  ii.  7.)  Saint  Paul  saith  he  was  or- 
dained an  apostle,  that  is,  a  teacher  of  the  Gentiles.  Thirdly, 
he  is  sure  he  hath  the  spirit,  not  to  erre  :  as  in  the  same  place, 
1  speak  the  truth  in  Christ,  I  lie  not.     And   (1  Cor.  vii,   40.) 

1)  See  Calvin,  vol.  ii.  p.  295.  4)  See  the  Note  on  Variations  of 

2)  Bishop  Doane,  as  above.  Prelacy,  lect.  vi.  p.  14;J,  J.')0. 

3;  Serm.  to  Presb.  p.237.  5)   See  in   Willet,  Syn.  Pap.  p. 

164,  (fee.,  Horn.  1,  9,  in  Matth. 


252         PRELATES    ARE    NOT    SUCCESSORS    OF  THE  APOSTLES.     [LECT.  X. 

I  thinke  that  1  have  the  spirit  of  God.  Wherefore  it  is  evi- 
dent, THAT  the  apostles  WERE  NO  BISHOPS,  PROPERLY  SO 
CALLED." 

Such,  also,  is  the  doctrine  of  Stapleton,!  of  Turreine  the  Jes- 
uit,^ of  Sutlivius,^  and  of  the  great  Ronnish  authority,  Bellar- 
mine,  who  "  denies  that  bishops  do  properly  succeed  the  apos- 
tles."^ 

That  the  apostles,  as  such,  were  extraordinary  officers,  and 
could  have  no  successors,  is  the  opinion,  also,  of  many  standard 
divines,  in  the  Church  of  England,  as  among  others,  so  of  Arch- 
bishops VVhateley,  and  Potter  ;  and  of  Bishops  Pearson,  Hoadly, 
Fell,  and  Davenant ;  —  and  of  the  Rev.  Messrs.  Barrow,  Whit- 
by, Willet,  Hooker,  Chillingworth,  Hinds,  Lightfoot,  Brett,  and 
Stillingfleet.^ 

To  this  host  of  authorities  must  be  added  the  evidence  of  all 
other  reformed  churches,  who  all  concur  in  this  opinion.  The 
proof,  then,  of  their  pretended  succession  to  the  true  office  of  the 
apostles,  rests  with  tliose  who  claim  it.  This  proof  they  have 
not  given,  nor  can  they  give  it.  Their  boasted  succession,  as 
you  have  seen,  is  not  sustained  by  scripture,  nor  borne  out  by 
history,  nor  by  the  application  of  their  own  instituted  canons. 
Neither  is  it  attested  by  an  appeal  to  evident  and  plain  facts. 
For  to  neither  the  name,  the  call,  the  endowments,  the  office, 
or  the  duties  of  an  apostle,  are  they  found  succeeding.  These 
points  of  dissimilarity  between  prelates  and  apostles,  we  might 
have  easily  increased.     Dr.  Ayton  has  drawn  out  twelve  partic- 

1)  Doct.  Prim.  lib.  vi.  cap.7:  "Ip-  and  writers  of  the  New  Testament, 
sius  apostolatus  nulla  successio.  Fini-  and  affixed  to  the  governors  of  the 
tur  enim  legatio,  nee  ad  successores  Christian  church."  And,  although 
ipsius  transit."  this  title  of  presbyter  had  been  also 

2)  See  quoted  in  Welles'  Vindi-  extended  to  a  second  order  in  the 
cation  of  Presb.  Ordin.  p.  83.  church,  and    is    now  only  in   use  for 

3)  Sutlivius  de  Pontif  Rom.  pp.  them,  under  the  name  of  presbyter, 
175,  176.  apud  Ayton.  yet  in  the  scripture  times,  it  belonged 

4)  "  Be]larmine,"say8Dr.  Willet,  principally,  if  not  alone,  to  bishops, 
(de  Pontif  lib.  iv.  25,)  '•  denieth  that  there  being  no  evidence  that  any  of 
bishops  do  properly  succeed  the  apos-  that  second  order  were  then  institu- 
tles."     Syn.  Pap.  p.  269.  ted."     In  plain  English,  the  Dr.  fairly 

5)  See  Note  on  the  Variations  grants  tiiat  presbyters,  in  scripture 
of  Prelacy,  lect.  vi.  p.  149.  times,  were  bishops,  and  bishops  were 

"  The  office  of  the  apostles  perished  presbyters;  i.  e.  they  were  one  and 

with  the   apostles,"   says  the  learned  the  same  order  and  office.'' 

Dodwell,  fDe  Nupero  Schism,  pp.  55,  Dr.    Bentley   also   says  that  "the 

68,  ed.  Lond.  1704,  in  Powell  on  Ap  presbyters,    while     the     apostles 

Sue.  p.  33,)  "in   which  office  there  lived,  were  t7rto->it.Trot,   bishops,  over- 

never  was  any  succession  to  any  of  seers."     (Randolph's  Enchri.  Theol. 

them,  except  to  Judas  the  traitor."  vol.  v.  p.  204.) 

So  also    Dr.    Hammond,  (in   ibid,)  Spanheim  Fil.  Dissert,  iii.  num.  25, 

declares,  that  the  word  presbyter  was  37   34,  though  a  friend  to  hier.  govt., 

"fitly  made   use  of  by   the  apostle*  in  Ayton.  app.  p.  10. 


LECT.  X.]  THE    SUCCESSION    THEREFORE    BASELESS.  253 

ulars,  in  which  it  is  impossible  that  there  should  be  any  real  suc- 
cessors to  the  office  and  character  of  the  apostles.'  But  enough 
has  been  said  to  unbare  the  nakedness  of  this  empty  claim  to  an 
extinguished  title,  and  an  unexisting  office. 

We  must  come,  therefore,  to  the  conclusion  of  the  learned 
Whitaker,"  "  munus  episcopi  nihil  est  ad  munus  apostolicum,  that 

THE  OFFICE  of  a  BISHOP   HAS   NOTHING   TO  DO  WITH  THE  OFFICE 

OF  AN  apostle;  "  and  with  Cardinal  Bellarmine,^  that  "epis- 
copi nullum  habent  partem  verae  apostolicae  auctoritas.  Bishops 

HAVE  NO   part  OF  THE  TRUE  APOSTOLICAL  AUTHORITY."* 

And  since,  as  Dr.  Chapman  allows,  this  is  the  very  hinge  of 
our  controversy  — and  it  has  been  proved  defective,  and  as  such, 
to  have  been  abandoned  by  men  than  whom  none  stand  higher, 
either  in  the  Romish  or  Anglican  churches  —  we  are  brought 
safely  to  our  conclusion,  that  when  tested  by  facts,  this  pre- 
latic  doctrine  of  apostolical  succession  is  found  to  be  what  it 
is  when  tested  by  scripture,  history,  or  reason,  utterly  vain  and 
groundless. 

To  what,  then,  shall  we  liken  these  prelates,  and  whereunto 
shall  we  compare  these  successors  of  the  apostles,  who  think  it 
no  shame  to  obtrude  upon  the  notice  of  the  world  titles  which 
their  ancestors  were  too  modest  to  assume?  and  to  glory  in 
that  to  which  they  thought  it  not  even  "  decent "  to  pretend  ? 
They  appear  unto  our  minds,  reflecting  upon  these  things,  as 
would  the  self-proclaimed  successors  of  the  supreme  functiona- 
ries whom  we  may  imagine  to  have  been   appointed  by  some 

1)  Orig.  Constit.  of  the  Ch.  ch.  Hoadly's  Works,  fol.  vol.  ii.  p. 
i.  §  ii.  p.  20.  827. 

2)  De  Pontif.  Quest,  iii.  cap.  iii.  See  a  full  argument  to  prove  they 
p.  69,  in  Powell,  p.  48.  had  not  and  could  not  have,  in  Dr. 

3)  De  Romano  Pont.  lib.  iv.  cap.  Willett,  Syn.  Pap.  p.  164,  and  again 
xxiv.  in  same.  on  p.  165. 

4)  "  The  ordination  or  consecra-  This  is  admitted  by  Hooker,  as  it 
tion,  whatever  it  might  be,  to  that  regards  the  special  character  of  apos- 
ofEce  of  bishop,  of  itself  conveyed  ties,  in  Eccl.  Pol.  b.  vii.  §  4,  vol.  iii.  p. 
neither  inspiration  nor  the  power  of  lti7,  Keble's  ed. 

working  miracles,  rchich,  with  the  di-  Burton's  Hist,  of  the  Ch.  ch.  viii. 

red  commission  from  our  Lord  himself ,  p.  177,  Am.  ed. 

distinguished  and  set  apart  the  prima-  That  the  apostolic  office  and  the 
ry  apostles  from  the  rest  of  mankind.  prelatical  are  irreconcilably  different, 
It  was  only  IN  a  very  limited  and  see  shown  by  Dr.  Barrow,  Pope's  Sup. 
IMPERFECT  SENSE,  that  they  could,  Supp.  iii.  Works,  vol.  i.  fol.  p.  598 
even  in  the  sees  founded  by  tiie  apos-  See  this  subject  well  illustrated  in 
ties,  be  called  the  successors  of  the  Dr.  Mitchell's  Letters  to  Bishop  Skin- 
apostles."     Milman's  Hist,  of  Christ.  ner,  p.  72. 

vol.  ii.  pp.  70,  72.  See  also  full  on  in  the  Altare   Da- 

Our  blessed   Lord   is  "  the   bishop  mascenum    Davidis    Calderwood,    p. 

(that  is,  overseer)  of  our  souls,  as  the  190,  &c. 

apostle  calls  him.     It  is  a  sacrilege,  See  also  Colman's  Christian  Antiq. 

therefore,  to  lake  that  regard  which  is  p.  69;  Peirce's  Vind.  of  Dissent,  part 

du*  to  him  and  plac«  it  upon  others."  iii.  ch.  i.  p.  44,  &c. 


254  THE    PARABLE    OF    THE    PRELACY.  [lECT.  X. 

eastern  monarch  for  some  great  and  special  ends.  Tliese  we 
will  suppose  received  their  office  by  the  special  favor  of  their 
prince,  were  named  after  a  peculiar  title  of  royal  bestovvment, 
were  enrolled  in  garments  of  official  splendor  and  most  marked 
distinction,  were  empowered  to  discharge  functions  of  the  most 
rarely  delegated  trust,  and  seated  upon  thrones  of  imperial 
grandeur  around  their  favoring  monarch. 

And  now,  in  a  distant  age,  and  a  remote  province ;  when 
direct  exposure  of  their  claims  is  deemed  impossible,  impostors 
are  found  boldly  demanding  from  the  over-awed  multitude,  that 
submissive  reverence  and  obedience,  which  were  due  only  to 
the  true,  and  original,  and  exalted  nobility.  These  individuals 
have  no  immediate  appointment  by  their  sovereign  ;  no  certi- 
fied and  honorary  titles  ;  no  royal  robes  of  office  ;  no  insignia  of 
authority  ;  nor  any  privileged  admission  to  the  royal  presence  ; 
nor  any  confidential  use  of  the  royal  signet.  And  yet,  in  con- 
scious destitution  of  one  and  all  of  the  essential  and  distinctive 
marks  of  this  noble  order,  they  erect  themselves  into  an  aris- 
tocracy ;  and,  in  the  absence  of  the  sovereign,  subjugate  the 
rightful  officers  of  the  kingdom,  deprive  them  of  all  dignity,  re- 
duce them  to  the  condition  of  servile  obeisance  to  their  com- 
mand ;  and  "  load  themselves  to  suffocation  with  unearned 
emoluments,  and  trail  after  them  as  they  go,  a  long  purse, 
crammed  with  the  price  of  ruined  subjects,"  "the  victims  of  their 
aristocratic  rapacity.'"  Oh,  when  their  sovereign  Lord  returns 
in  great  power,  and  takes  to  himself  the  sword  of  vengeance, 
will  he  not  speak  forth  in  anger,  and  confound  them  and  their 
abettors  with  perpetual  shame  ? 

He  that  hath  ears  to  hear  let  him  hear. 

1)  Spirit.  Desp.  pp.  395,  397. 


ADDITIONAL  NOTES  TO  LECTURE  TENTH. 


NOTE   A. 


So  also  Dr.  Hammond  in  Luke  vi.  13.  "  The  name  (apostle)  hath  no  mor ) 
in  it  than  to  sijrnify  messenger  or  legate."  "  Amonff  the  Jews  all  sorts  of 
messengers  are  called  apostles.  So  Abijah  (1  Kings,  xiv.  6.)  is  called  (j^Khi^ai 
curscTToxisc.  that  is,  a  harsh  apostle  or  messenger  of  ill  news.  And  in  the  Old 
Testament  the  word  is  no  otherwise  used.  Among  the  Talmudists  it  is  used 
of  them  that  were,  by  the  rulers  of  the  synagogues  sent  out  to  receive  the  tentlis 
and  dues  that  belonged  to  the  synagogues.  And  in  like  manner  the  messen- 
GEKS  of  the  church  tiiat  carried,  letters  congratulatory,  from  one  to  another, 
are,  by  Ignatius,  called  (TsotT^o^cu  and  bioTrgiT^wrAt,  the  divine  carriers  or 
ambassadors;  and  so  in  the  Theodosian  (J ode x,  tit.  de  Judaicis ,  di\tosU\W  a:e 
those  that  were  sent  by  the  patriarch  at  a  set  time,  to  require  tiie  gold  and  sil- 
ver due  to  them." 

"  The  reader  will  observe,"  says  Mr.  Powell,  "  that  St.  Paul  does  not  num- 
ber Titus  with  these  apostles,  or  more  properly,  messengers ;  tind  for  this  plain 
reason,  these  messengers  were  persons  chosen  or  ordained  by  the  churches  to 
this  business,  —  Titus  was  not;  but  only  sent  in  company  with  them  by  the 
apostle  ;  they,  therefore,  were  messengers  of  the  churches,  and  they  only  ;  (2  Cor. 
viii.  23  ;)  "  Wliether  any  do  inquire  of  Titus,  he  is  mv  par t?ier  and  fcllow-lielper 
concerning  you  ;  or  our  brethren  be  inquired  of,  they  are  the  messengers  of 
the  churches,  and  the  glory  of  Christ."  "  In  Phil.  ii.  25,  it  seems  to  be  used 
again  to  mean  a  public  m,^sscnger,  a.  messenger  of  the  church,  sent  on  their 
public  business.  Bishop  Taylor  here  actually  perverts  the  sense  by  a  false 
translation.  He  renders  a-vti^yoc,  my  ^^  compeer,"  in  order  to  raise  Epaphro- 
ditus,  as  a  prototype  of  modern  bishops,  to  equality  with  apostles.  He  would 
thus  make  Priscilla  and  Aquila,  (Rom.  xvi.  3,)  apostolic  compeers,  tou; 
a-uHpyiui  /uiu  ;  and  perhaps  Priscilla  would  stand  as  a  prototype  for  a  race  of 
female  bishops  !  Will  he  also  make  apostles  themselves  compeers  with  God, 
because  they  were  workers  together  with  him,  ©liu  ycig  itrjuiv  irvvi^yoi? 
(1  Cor.  iii.  9.)  The  apostle's  language,  however,  is  distinct,  as  before  : — '•  Yet 
1  suppose  it  necessary  to  send  to  you  Epaphroditus,  my  companion  in  labor, 
trvvifiyc'/  y.iij,  but  YUUR  messenger,  vfji.mvi't  dTroa-oxov."  (Phil.  ii.  25.)  Dodwell 
has  the  candor  and  good  sense  to  see  this. 

•'  But  we  may  easily  gather  from  the  epistle  to  the  Phillippians  to  what  the 
office  of  Epaphroditus,  as  anaj)ostle  or  messenger,  referred  ;  (chap.  iv.  v.  Id  :) 
'  But  1  have  all,  and  abound  :  I  am  full,  having  received  of  Epaphroditus  the 
things  which  were  sent  from  you,  an  odor  of  a  sweet  smell,  a  sarrifice  accepta- 
ble, well  pleasing  to  God.'  His  office,  therefore,  bi.lungcd  to  PECUNIARY 
affairs.     Rem  igitur  pecuniariam  speclabat  ilia  legatio."  Powell,  pp.  38,  39. 

NOTE  B. 

We  will  here  add  a  very  interesting  passage  from  this  same  work  bearing 
on  this  same  subject,  (pp.  164,  Ifi?.)  "  Indifference  to  preaching  has  charac- 
terized all  spiritual  declensions  in  the  churches :  and  every  revival  of  religion 


256  NOTES    TO    LECTURE    X. 

has  been  produced  by,  and  accompanied  with,  an  increased  zeal  and  desire  for 
the  preaching  of  the  cross.  In  proof  of  this,  I  refer  you  to  the  history  of  every 
church  in  every  by-gone  time.  But  you  need  not  lead  far.  Most  of  us  can 
refer  to  the  days  of  our  childhood,  when  a  teii-minutes'  sermon  —  if  sermon  it 
might  be  called,  that  unction  of  truth  had  none  —  once  on  the  Sunday,  was 
enough  for  ears  polite  —  and  when  our  cleriry  were  the  sportsmen  of  our  fields, 
the  stewards  of  our  race-courses,  and  the  beaux  of  our  ball-rooms;  and  the 
'  Family  Bible  '  was  a  '  Sunday  book.'  Howbeit,  tliose  were  the  daj's  in 
which  our  grandmoihers  wore  black  in  lent,  and  our  church  bells  rang  duly, 
wo  say  not  how  persuasively,  every  Wednesday  and  Friday  through  the  year; 
the  penance  of  the  rapid  parson,  and  the  droning  clerk,  whom  the  attendance 
of  some  half-dozen  card-playing  septuagenarians  brought  within  the  compulsory 
limits  of  the  law.  We  have  seen  great  changes,  and  these  are  things  out  of 
memory,  save  to  our  gratitude  that  they  exist  no  longer. 

"  But  what  in  scarce  the  third  part  of  a  century  has  made  so  great  a  differ- 
ence.'  "The  foolishness  of  preaching,'  the  zeal  lor  preaching,  and  the  demand 
for  preaching  ;  first  out  of  our  church,  and  subsequently  in  it.  Our  gospel 
preachers  have  changed  the  tastes  of  the  people,  and  the  opinions  of  the  people 
have  affected  the  whole  character  of  the  ministry.  The  moral  essays  have 
succumbed  to  empty  pews;  the  dissipated  churchman  has  become  the  marked 
exception  among  a  body  of  truly  pastoral  clergy  ;  the  knowledge  of  divinity  is 
now  necessary  to  reputation  in  the  profession  of  it ;  self-interest  looks  for  spir- 
itual jrilts  in  the  incumbency  ;  and  wliere  the  truth  is  to  be  heard,  the  week- 
d  ly  bell  no  longer  rings  in  vain.  We  have  been  witnesses  of  this  great 
change  :  and  we  know  it  is  attributable  to  God's  blessing,  not  upon  sacraments 
and  church  services  —  for  they  were  always  there  :  but  upon  the  evangelical 
preaching  of  the  cross  in  the  churches.  Must  we  live  to  see  these  steps 
retraced.''  Are  our  ministers  to  be  taught  once  more  that  it  needs  no  sacred 
study  to  read  a  form  of  prayer,  and  no  spiritual  experience  to  deliver  sacra- 
ments, and  nothing  but  ordination  and  a  cure,  to  make  a  minister  of  Jesus 
Christ? 

"  Shall  our  people  be  taught  again,  that  all  who  love  or  need  the  word  of  life 
must  forsake  the  church  and  betake  themselves  to  the  meeting-house  .'  We 
trust,  and  yet  we  fear.  With  deepest  grief  we  see  the  leaven  workinij  far  dis- 
tantly from  where  liie  insidious  mischief  lurks.  We  hear  the  altered  tone  of 
some  whose  hearts  we  think  unchanged :  some  who  owe  the  conversion  of 
their  souls  to  tiie  preaching  of  the  gospel ;  who  loved  it  better  than  their 
necessary  food  ;  have  been  cheered  by  it  in  their  sorrows  and  checked  by  it  in 
their  sins;  and  would  have  made  many  sacrifices  rather  than  forego  it.  Now 
they  discover  that  preaching  does  not  signify,  they  go  to  church  to  pray.  We 
tell  them,  had  they  always  thought  so,  they  had  not  been  what  they  are.  Wiiy 
not.'  There  is  a  liturgy  sufficient  for  the  exhibition  of  the  truth.  It  has  not 
been  found  so  ;  and  it  has  not  been  written  so.  The  commission  and  command 
of  Jesus  is  to  preach  and  the  blessing  of  the  Father  has  ever  been  upon  the 
hearing  of  the  gospel.  We  appeal  to  scripture  and  we  appeal  to  facts;  we 
appeal  to  the  experience  of  your  own  souls,  which  you  are  dulling  into 
jndifferenfe,  and  chilling  into  stone,  by  withholding  yourselves  from  the  sus- 
tenation  Gud  has  appointed  for  you;  to  feed  not  upon  prtiycr,  —  that  was 
never  sppar;ited  from  the  hearing  of  the  truth,  in  public  or  in  j)rivale;  as  if  the 
urging  of  God's  ffracicus  message  upon  you,  should  supersede  the  responses 
of  your  soul  to  him,  or  the  invitations  of  your  grace  indispose  you  to  commu- 
nion with  himself.  They  never  did,  they  never  could.  Ynu  know  they  did 
not;  you  know  yon  never  joined  the  public  services  with  less  fervor,  because 
you  came  to  hear  the  truth  from  the  pulpit;  possibly  you  know,  that  till  jou 
heard  it  from  the  pulpit,  you  never  felt  the  value  of  the  liturgy,  or  enjoyed 
those  services  at  all.  Alas  '  the  litursry  itself  is  to  share  the  degradation  ;  the 
value  is  to  be  in  the  place  where  it  is  said,  the  lips  that  utter  it,  tiie  parish  church, 
the  canonical  hours,  the  clerical  vestments,  the  disused  ceremonies.  Give  us 
votaries  at  once  to  count  our  paternosters,  for  our  most  spiritual  litursry  has 
become  a  dead-letter,  too:   waiting  upon  this  mummery  to  give  it  elEcacy." 


LECTURE  XI. 


THE      PRELATICAL      DOCTRINE     OF     APOSTOLICAL     SUCCESSION      ESSEN- 
TIALLY   POPISH    IN    ITS    TENDENCY    AND    RESULTS. 

We  now  proceed  to  show  that  this  doctrine  of  the  apostolical 
succession  is,  in  its  tendency,  decidedly  and  essentially  popish, 
and  as  such  is  to  be  eschevvei  by  every  protestant  who  prefers 
spiritual  liberty  and  pure  doctrine,  to  spiritual  despotism  and  cor- 
ruption. 

This  truth  has  glared  forth  upon  us  already,  in  attempting  to 
fathom  the  depths  of  that  thick  darkness  in  which  its  history  is 
so  impenetrably  shrouded.  But  it  will  be  important  to  bring  it 
into  tlie  clearer  ligl)t  of  a  distinct  discussion.  For  some  time, 
we  questioned  the  expediency  of  introducing  this  topic  at  all. 
We  are  well  aware,  that  such  a  charge,  alleged  against  any 
sincerely  protestant  communion,  is,  if  not  well  sustained,  the 
most  opprobrious  and  calumnious  with  which  we  could  assail  it. 
We  are  also  apprized  that  the  abettors  of  this  doctrine,  from 
Laud  to  Percival,  or  Hook,  disavow  altogether  any  tendency 
toward  Romanism,  and  even  controvert  many  of  its  grossest 
errors  ;'  and  that  we  may  very  easily  be  made  to  appear, 
by  such  representations,  in  the  light  of  a  false  witness  against 
men    of    learning,    piety,    and    true    devotion    to    the    English 

1)  On  the  disavowal  of  this  charge  ormation,  under  the  unfair  epithet  of 

the  London  Cliristian   Obs.   remarks,  ultra-protestantism;    but    amidst    all 

(Feb.  1841,   p.  72.)  •'  True   it  is,  that  their  foil-fencing    with  popery,  they 

the   Oxford    tract    sect    are   loud    in  manage  never  to  put  in  a  mortal  thrust; 

their  declamations  agniiist  what  they  there  may  be   dust,  and   noise,  and  a 

call    '  the    errors   of    the    church    of  little  superficial  wounding,  but  its  vi- 

Rome,' — tliough    not    so  loud   as  in  tality  is  safe  at  their  hands  ;  it  plumes 

their  denunciations  of  the  fundamen-  itself  upon  their   aid;  it   boasts   that 

tal  tenets  of  the  churches  of  the  ref-  they  advocate  its  leading  principles; 

33 


258 


THE    DEMAND    FOR    THIS    DISCUSSION. 


[lect.  XI. 


church.  Notwithstanding,  however,  all  this,  and  more  than 
this  ;  and  ahhough  we  may  suhject  ourselves  to  the  charge  of 
illiberality  and  harshness,  we  do  not  feel  at  liberty  to  "keep 
silence."  The  interests  of  truth,  of  charity,  and  of  the  great 
proiestant  cause,  demand  the  candid  and  explicit  avowal  of  our 
sentiments  and  our  fears.  The  very  fact  that  the  true  charac- 
ter and  tendency  of  this  system  is  not  understood  by  many  who 
receive  it;  —  by  many  of  the  clergymen,  and  we  believe  the 
greatest  portion  of  the  members  of  the  protestant  e[)iscopal 
church  upon  which  it  is  fastening  itself,  and  into  whose  veins 
it  is  infusing  its  poisonous  influence,  loudly  demands  that  the 
subject  should  be  fairly  presented  to  their  minds. 

The  remembrance  also  of  the  open,  avowed,  and  continual  rep- 
robation of  this  doctrine,  from  the  very  first  intimations  of  it  until 
the  present  hour,  as  popish,  and  as  dragging  with  it  many  popish 
consequences,  by  all  our  puritan,  non-conformist,  and  presby- 
terian  ancestors;'  —  equally  requires  that  we,  their  posterity, 
should  sustain  them  in  their  faithful  contendings  for  the  truth,  as 
far  as  circumstances  make  necessary.  The  signs  of  the  times, 
the  ominous  portents  which  skirt  the  lowering  sky,  and  foretoken 
coming  danger,  the  events  which  are  daily  transpiring  around 
us,  and  the  boasted  and  increasing  converts  to  Romanism  and 


and  wherever  the  Oxford  tracts  have 
produced  any  effect,  popery  has  risen 
in  estimation.  It  is  not  indeed  im- 
maculate ;  that  is  not  pretended — but 
it  is  much  more  estimable  than  prot- 
estant slander  has  accounted  it ;  and 
much  is  itlamented  that  the  Anglican 
and  Romanist  churches  do  not  better 
understand  each  others'  good  qualities, 
and  make  common  cause  against  the 
incursions  of  that  direful  monster  — 
protestantism."  To  the  allegations 
that  these  Oxford  divines  are  eminent 
for  piety,  for  talent,  and  for  opposi- 
tion to  popery,  see  the  reply  of  Bishop 
Mcllvaine  in  his  "  Oxford  Divinity," 
&c.,  in  which  he  shows  that  herein 
lies  the  greatest  dangc  from  their 
writings.  See  pp.  ]2,  27,  &c  ,  30, 
132,  133.  Again,  speaking  of  their 
service  for  Bishop  Ken's  day,  he  says, 
"  a  more  barefaced  insult,  to  all  de- 
cent consistency  with  the  principles 
of  the  Church  of  England  was  never 
perpetrated."  p.  271. 

"  You  disclaim,"  says  Dr.  George 
Miller  in  his  Letter  to  Dr.  Pusey,  (p. 
26,)  "and  doubtless  with  sincerity, 
any  intention,  or  wish,  to  return  to 
the  communion  of  the  church  of 
Rome  ;  but  you  do  actually  return  to 
that  assertion   of  church    authority, 


which  by  degrees  was  matured  into 
the  monstrous  usurpation  of  the  pa- 
pacy." 

See  on  this  apparent  opposition 
to  Romish  errors,  and  the  greater 
danger  to  be  apprehended  in  conse- 
quence of  it,  Lond.  Chr.  Obs.,  1839, 
p.  (i31,  &c. 

Bib.  Report,  1838,  p.  116. 

Mr  Taylor,  in  the  second  volume 
of  his  Ancient  Christianity,  declares 
that  "  the  controversy  which  has  been 
originated  by  the  Oxford  tract  writers 
involves  nothing  less  than  the  sub- 
stance of  Christianity  itself,"'  {Dedica- 
tion, p.  8,)  --  that  "  the  venom  of  the 
Oxford  tract  doctrines  has  been  in- 
sidiously shed  into  the  bosoms  of  per- 
haps a  majority  of  the  younger  clergy 
of  the  episcopal  church,"  (p.  3,)  and 
that  "  this  system  differs  from  popery 
tlieologiraUy  in  several  points,  and 
politicully  or  ecclesiastically ;  but  that 
there    is    a    spiritual    and  moral 

IDENTITV      OF      THE     TWO."      (p.     69.) 

See  also  Note  A. 

1)  See  above  in  Lect.  vii.  See 
Neal's  History  ;  Price's  History  of 
Nonconform.  ;  Pierce's  Vind.  of  Dis- 
senters, &.C.  Lond.  1717,  part  ii.  ch.  i. 
p.  6,  &c. 


LECT,  XI.]  THE    PRINCIPLES    OF    POPERY. 

prelacy  ;  all  conspire  to  determine  the  question  of  duty,  and  to 
inspirit  us  to  put  the  trumpet  to  our  mouths  and  blow  an  alarm 
in  Zion. 

We  will,  therefore,  proceed  to  a  more  full  consideration  of 
this  charge  against  this  system,  and  to  place  it  in  such  a  light  as 
that  it  cannot  possibly  be  denied. 

We  will  not,  however,  argue  that,  because  this  system  is  com- 
mon to  the  Roman,  and  to  the  Laudean  sect  in  the  Anglican 
church,  therefore,  the  Anglican  church  is  popish ;  for  it  is 
very  clear,  how  many  things  may  be  both  scriptural  and  proper, 
although  found  in  the  Romish  system,  which,  with  much  error, 
has  also  preserved  much  that  is  valuable  and  true.  We  will 
appeal,  therefore,  to  evidence  clear  and  incontrovertible;  and 
which  shall  be  authenticated  by  testimony  from  episcopalians 
themselves. 

This  tendency  we  will  illustrate  in  the  first  place,  by  showing 
the  analogy  between  this  doctrine,  as  embraced  by  the  Romish 
and  by  the  Anglican  churches.* 

The  church  of  Rome  puts  in  the  place  of  the  one  mediator 
Jesus  Christ,  not  only  angels,  the  Virgin  Mary,  and  the  saints, 
but  the  church  in  general,  and  every  priest  in  particular.  This 
vicarious  religion,  by  which  the  heart  is  led  to  repose  its  cares, 
and  to  rest  its  hopes,  upon  something  external  to  itself;  —  veiled 
as  it  is  from  full  comprehension,  by  a  character  of  mysteriousness 
and  terror  —  is  the  very  soul  of  superstition,  and  of  the  whole 
mass  of  Romish  errors.  Now  the  channel  through  which  the  full 
tide  of  this  mysterious  grace  is  made  to  flow  is  the  church ;  and 
that  tide  itself  is  invisibly  conveyed  by  the  agency  of  this  lineal 
succession,  on  which  the  honor,  the  power,  the  efficacy,  and  the 
increase  of  the  church  depends.  This  is  the  idol,  not  only  of 
rabbinical  and  Romish,  but  also  of  protestant  popery;  which 
has  its  traditionary  legends  also,  of  which  this  doctrine  is  the 
manifestation.  Or  we  may  say,  that  as  there  is  Jewish  popery,  so 
this  is  Gentile  rabbinism  ;  of  both'  which,  it  is  the  inevitable  ten- 
dency, to  exalt  man  and  dethrone  God  ;  to  make  void,  and  vain, 
and  powerless,  the  divine  record ;  and  to  confirm  human  authority ; 
to  establish  a  righteousness  to  be  accomplished  by  works  ;  and 
to  overturn  that  righteousness,  which  is  by  faith  in  the  meritorious 
righteousness  of  another. 

These,  therefore,  are  fundamental  principles  in  the  system  of 
popery,  that  God  has  delegated  to  the  visible  corporation  of  the 

1)  That  is,  supposing  this  system  2)   W  hate  ley  on  Romish  Errors, 

to  be  embraced,  as  its  advocates  con-      ch.  ii. 

tend,  by  the  Anglican  church.  3)    See   Mc  Caul's   Sketches   of 

Judaism,  p.  2. 


260  THE    PRINCIPLES    OF    POPERY.  [lECT.  XI. 

church,  the  entire  management  and  control  of  man's  spiritual 
relations,  and  has,  therefore,  cominiited  to  their  trust  the  pleni- 
tude of  grace:  That  this  visible  society  is,  by  express  appoint- 
ment one,  unchanged,  and  perpetual:  That  however  wicked 
may  be  the  persons  who  administer  the  government  of  this 
church,  the  church  itself  will  be  assuredly  preserved  indefectible, 
and  its  acts  be  ratified  in  heaven  :  And  that  the  whole  efficacy 
of  the  church  depends  on  the  transmission  of  this  original  com- 
munication of  divine  grace,  in  an  unbroken  succession  of  lineal 
descendants  of  the  apostles. 

On  these  apparently  harmless  propositions  is  reared  the  entire 
fabric  of  that  spiritual  despotism,  which  at  length  usurped  do- 
minion over  the  civil  and  religious  interests  of  man  —  over  his 
body  as  well  as  his  soul  —  over  his  thoughts  as  well  as  his 
actions  —  which  claimed  to  direct  his  understanding  and  to  tutor 
his  conscience  —  which  haunted  him  with  fear  through  life,  with 
terror  in  death,  and  then  "  delving  into  the  sepulchre,"  followed 
him  with  its  persecuting  anathemas  to  the  very  fires  of  that  penal 
wrath,  from  which  it  alone  could  deliver.' 

Now  every  one  of  these  principles,  from  which  these  conse- 
quences have  flowed,  are  most  certainly  included  in  this  prelatic 
theory;  and  are  most  fully  avowed  by  its  advocates.  This 
doctrine  of  the  apostolic  succession  is  nothing  more  nor  less  than 
a  second  edition  of  the  Romish  anathema — extra  ecclesiam 
prelaticam  salus  non  esse  potest.^  By  confining  to  the  clergy  — 
and  to  one  order  of  the  clergy  —  and  to  a  baronial  and  aristo- 
cratic class  of  the  clergy  —  the  exclusive,  supreme,  and  heaven- 
appointed  right  to  all  ecclesiastical  power  and  jurisdiction  — 
with  the  uncontrolled  power  of  continuing  their  own  succession, 
and  of  interpreting,  by  their  authority,  (i.  e.  the  church,)  the 
laws  and  doctrines  of  Christ's  kingdom  —  there  is  a  foundation 
laid,  broad  enough  to  sustain  the  most  unbounded  exercise  of 
ghostly  tyranny.  These  avowed  principles  justify  all  those 
practices,  which  necessarily  flow  from  them,  and  by  which  the 
church  has  asserted  her  right  to  a  universal  lordship  over  the 
bodies  and  the  souls  of  men. 

This  apostolical  succession  is  distinctly  affirmed  by  Mr.  New- 
man, to  be  one  of  those  many  essential  points,  which  the  Romish 
and  the  Anglican  churches,  "in  common  both  hold."^ 

It  is  the  same  "  ruling,  grasping,  ambitious  principle,"  in 
both. — In  both,  it  is  involved  in  that  same  profound  obscurity 
which  gives  fitting  room  for  fabulous  legends,  and  unauthentica- 

1)  See  Dr.  Rice's  Considerations      Hough's  Vindication,  p.  64.     He  de- 
on  Religion,  pp.  79,  82,  83,  84.  nominates  this  antichrist. 

2)  See     Henry      Martyn      in  3)  On  Romanism,  p.  56. 


LECT.  XI. 1        THE    PRINCIPLES    OF    PRELACY    AND    POPEKY.  261 

ted  affirmations.  — In  both,  it  is  attended  with  the  same  errors 
in  doctrine,  and  in  practice.  —  In  both,  it  places  the  efficacy 
of  the  gospel  in  its  forms,  and  not  in  its  doctrines  ;  and  the 
true  power  and  validity  of  the  ministry,  in  its  commission,  and 
not  in  its  character,  and  qualifications  ;  in  its  outward  and  gene- 
alogical relations,  and  not  in  any  inward  and  spiritual  call.  —  In 
both,  it  involves  the  absolute  exclusion  from  the  christian  pale, 
of  the  greatest  part  of  protestant  communions.  —  In  both,  it 
presents  an  insuperable  barrier  to  the  reformation  of  what  is 
corrupt.  —  In  both,  it  implies  indefectibility,  and  the  continual 
presence  of  God's  indwelling  Spirit.'  —  And,  in  both,  it  is  at- 
tended by  the  same  insuperable  difficulties,  and  monstrous  con- 
sequences.^ Are  we  unjust  in  deducing  such  inferences  from 
such  premises  ?  Let  us  then  put  ourselves  under  the  guidance 
of  jNIr.  Palmer.  "  If,"  says  he,  "communion  with  the  Roman 
see  (we  say,  the  prelatical,  or  Anglican  church)  be,  as  they 
say,  absolutely  and  simply  necessary,  so  that  he  who  is  separa- 
ted from  it,  is  cut  off  from  the  catholic  church^  of  Christ,  then 
the  Roman  pontiff,  (i.  e.  the  church,  i.  e.  the  prelates,)  must  be 
infallible,  in  defining  controversies  of  faith  ;  because  it  is  not  to 
be  believed  that  God  would  impose  the  absolute  necessity  of 
communicating  with  him  (i.  e.  it)  otherwise.  It  follows  equal- 
ly, that  he  (the  church)  must  have  absolute  power  in  ecclesiasti- 
cal affairs  ;  for,  if  he  (the  church)  enforces  any  thing  under  the 
penalty  of  excommunication,  it  must  be  obeyed.  It  also  fol- 
lows, that  the  church  cannot  fall  into  heresy,  even  when  not 
defining  ex  cathedra,  because  no  one  can  be  entitled  to  forsake 
his  communion,"*  &ic.  &,c. 

This  argument  is  just  as  conclusive  when  applied  to  the  An- 
glican prelacy,  as  to  the  Romish  hierarchy.  Both  make  sub- 
stantially the  very  same  claims,  to  be  the  one,  catholic  church 
of  Jesus  Christ,  and  both,  therefore,  are  responsible  for  all  the 
consequences  which  such  claims  necessarily  imply.* 

1)  Mr.  Gladstone  claims  inspira-  lecture  in  proof  of  the  indefectibility 
tion  for  the  church,  which  is  "  an  in-      of  the  church,  lect.  viii 

heritance  not  only  of  antiquity,  but  5)  Thus    Mr.    Keble,  in  his  Dis- 

also  of  inspiration  "  course  on  Primitive  Tradition,  instan- 

2)  See  Lond.  Chr.  Ob.,  May,  ces  among  other  difficulties  which  he 
1839,  p.  2no.  supposes  must  have   lately  exercised 

3)  "  Individuals  among  us,"  says  the  minds  of  the  Anglo-catholic  cler- 
Dr.  Pusey,  (Letter,  p  218,  Eng.  ed.)  gy,  '•  how  the  freedom  of  the  Angli- 
"  are  bound  to  remain  in  the  church  can  church  may  be  vindicated  against 
through  whose  ministry  they  have  the  exorbitant  claims  of  Rome,  and 
been  made  members  of  Christ."  See  yet  no  disparagement  ensue  to  the 
Miller's  Li-tter,  to  p.  73.  authority    inherent    in    the    catholic 

4)  Palmer  on  Church,  vol.  ii.  pp.  apostolical  church."     P.  G,  ed.  iv. 
529,  530  and   see,  also,  pp.  4!i3,  497,  In    illustrating    the    guilt    of   one 
&c.  6ui.     Mr.  Newman  has  a  whole  church   throwing   off    all   fellowship 


262 


THE    POPISH    TENDENCY    OF    PRELACY 


[lect.   XI. 


But  clear  as  is  this  inference  from  tiie  analogy  between  these 
two  systems,  in  those  elemental  principles  which  sustain  the 
whole  fabric  of  Romanism,  we  are  able  fully  to  substantiate  our 
charge,  by  plain  and  palpable  facts. 

In  order,  then,  at  once  and  most  clearly,  to  establish  the 
popish  tendency  of  this  doctrine,  it  is  only  necessary  to  show, 
that  with  it,  all  those  other  doctrines  which  constitute  what  is 
now  designated  Oxford  divinity,  are  necessarily  connected  ;  and 
secondly,  that  these  doctrines,  thus  springing  from  this  dogma 
as  their  germ  or  root,  and  branching  forth  into  all  the  ramifica- 
tions of  the  system,  are  to  be  pronounced  Romish  in  their  char- 
acter. 

Now,  that  this  doctrine  of  prelatical  succession  does  necessa- 
rily imply  all  those  other  doctrines  by  which  the  Oxford  divin- 
ity is  characterized,  will  appear  from  the  fact,  that  these  weighty 
consequences  are  deduced  from  this  axiomatic  principle  by  these 
divines  themselves,  while  this  connexion  is  urged  upon  their 
brethren  as  an  irresistible  argument  for  their  adoption. 

In  a  very  able  and  elaborate  treatise  on  "The  American 
Church,"  contained   in  the  British  Critic,"  for  October,  1839, 


with  others  who  yet  hold  to  funda- 
mentals, Bishop  Davenant  remarks  : 
"  Non  mirainur  papistas,  qui  prseter 
ipsum  christum  aliud  fundamentum 
personale,  aliud  caput,  alium  sponsum 
dederunt  ecclesiap,  omnes  ecclesias 
abscindere  et  abjicere  quantumvis 
fideliter  et  firmiter  fiiristo   adhseren- 

tes Nee  miramur  stultus  eorundem 

clamores,  quibus  putant  se  perterre- 
facere  posse  ecclesias  Chrisli."  Ad- 
hortiatio  ad  Pacem  Eccl.  Cant.  1640, 
p57. 

1)  See  on  p.  308. 

That  the  British  Oitic  may  be  fair- 
ly quoted  as  high  authority  in  this 
controversy,  will  appear,  froin  the  fol- 
lowiniT  communication,  taken  from 
the  Charleston  Gospel  Messenger  for 
April.  1841 

"  The,  British  Critic.  —  Mr.  Editor, 
allow  me,  through  your  paores,  to  call 
the  attention  of  your  readers  to  the 
above  valuable  periodical,  which  in  a 
recent  number  of  '  The  Banner  of  the 
Cross,'  is  thus  highly  commended  by 
Bishop  Doane,  of  New  Jersey.  '  It 
has  been  among  my  warmkst  wishes 
that  a  publisher  might  be  found  who 
would  give  to  the  clergy  and  laity  of 
our  churches,  and  to  all  lovers  of  high 
intellect,  imbued  with  primitive 
piety,  and  consecuated  at  the  altar 


of  tiie  Holy  One,  an  American  edi- 
tion of  this  ablest  of  all  the  British 
periodicals,  at  a  price  accessible  to  all. 
I  rejoice  to  say  that  better  even  than 
that  is  lo  be  done.  Wiley  and  Put- 
nam, of  New  York,  will  import  the 
British  Critic,  (two  annual  volumes 
of  five  hundred  pages  each,  in  quar- 
terly numbers,)  if  one  hundred  per- 
sons  order  it.     It  is  an  opportunity 

MOST  AUSPICIODS  to  the  BEST  INTER- 
ESTS OF  THEOLOGY  and  literature,  and 
I  venture  in  my  zealous  desire  for  its 
success,  to  call  the  attention  of  my 
brethren  to  it  under  my  own  name.  I 
speak  advisedly,  for  I  have  been  a 
subscriber  to  it  from  the  commence- 
ment of  the  present  series,  and  the 
whole  set,  now  twenty-eight,  volumes, 
are  on  the  shelves  of  my  library,  and 

AMONG  ITS  CHOICEST  CONTENTS.  It 
SHOULD  BE  IN  THE  HANDS  OF  EVERY 
CLERGYMAN,  AND  SHOULD  CIRCULATE 
IN  EVERY  PARISH.'  " 

"  A  subscription  list  has  been  left  at 
tiie  library,  Chalmer's  street,  and  at 
Mr.  A.  E.  Miller's  book-store.  It  is 
hoped  that  those  who  desire  to  see 
this  valuable  work  circulate  in  our 
country,  will  use  their  influence  in 
obtaining  the  requisite  number  of  sub- 
scribers." 

Now  let  the  reader  contrast  with 


LECT.  XI.]  MADE  EVIDENT  EY  FACTS.  263 

the  writer  says,  "  Now  as  to  the  American  church,  it  has  been 
her  privilege  to  begin  with  so  clear  an  announcement  of  that  ru- 
dimental  truth  on  which  all  true  churches  rest,  that  we  cannot 
but  believe  she  is  destined,  in  spite  of  obstacles,  to  advance  on- 
ward to  the  measure  of  the  stature  of  its  perfect  fullness.  She 
has  got  it  in  her,  and  with  gratitude  we  add,  that  the  most 
considerable  of  her  bishops,  living  and  dead,  have  developed  it 
accurately  no  little  way.  They  have  gone  forward  from  one 
truth  to  another  ;  from  the  apostolic  commission  to  the  succes- 
sion, from  the  succession  to  the  office,  —  in  the  office  they  have 
discerned  the  perpetual  priesthood,  in  the  priesthood  the  perpet- 
ual sacrifice,  in  the  sacrifice  the  glory  of  the  christian  church, 
its  power  as  a  fount  of  grace,  and  its  blessedness  as  a  gate  of 
heaven." 

"  They  had  felt  and  taught  most  persuasively  the  unearthly 
position  in  which  all  christians  stand,  and  their  real  commu- 
nion in  the  invisible  kingdom  of  God.  You  would  not  know 
whether  you  were  in  America  or  England,  while  their  books 
were  before  you,  in  Birmingham  or  in  New  York,  amid  the  col- 
lieries or  sugar-canes.  The  external  world  sinks  to  its  due  level; 
and  universal  suffrage  is  as  little  found  there,  as  in  the  house  of 
commons.  How  much  further  they  ought  to  have  gone,  what 
doctrines  they  left  latent,  and  what  they  but  half  developed,  we 
have  neither  purpose  nor  ability  to  say ;  but  without  determining 
what  would  be  presumptuous,  so  much  we  may  safely  maintain, 
that  there  is  no  conceivable  point  of  opinion,  or  practice,  or  rit- 
ual, or  usage,  in  the  church  system,  ever  so  minute,  no  detail  of 
faith  and  conduct  ever  so  extreme,  but  what  might  be  a  legiti- 
mate and  necessary  result  of  that  one  idea  or  formula  with  which 
they  started.  Mammoths  and  megatheria  are  known  by  their 
vertebrae ;  men's  bodily  temperaments  have  sometimes  been  dis- 
criminated by  their  nails ;  and  in  like  manner  there  is  no  devel- 
opment ever  so  ultimate,  but  may  be  the  true  offspring  of 
the  apostolical  principle.     A  gesture,  a  posture,  a  tone,  a  word,  a 

the   above  encomiam   the    following  by  any  of  its  members  is  much  to  be 

opinion  of  this  same  work  taken  from  deplored  ;  as  the  circumstance  affords 

the  London  (Episcopal)  Record,  and  lamentable  proof  either  of  great  incon- 

they  will  at  once  perceive  how  mat-  sistency  or  of  great  ignorance  of  its 

ters  are  working.  real  principles.     Some  are   no  doubt 

"  Among  these  periodicals  there  are  beguiled  by  the  lofty  pretensions  that 

some  worse  than   others.     The  most  are  made,  and  by  the  evangelic  strain 

rampant  in  advocating  what  is  popish  that  is  occasionally  adopted,   without 

are    the    British     Critic,    the    British  considering  that  all   this  is  in  imita- 

Magazine,  and  the  Church  Magazine.  tion  of  popery,  which  combines  some 

"  What  circulation  these  periodicals  truths  with  the  grossest  idolatry,  and 

have,  we  know  not.     Their  very  ex-  claims  the  higliest  prerogatives,  while 

istence  is  a  disgrace  to  our  church  ;  it  adopts  the  most  palpable  errors  and 

and  that  they  should  be  countenanced  the  most  puerile  absurdities." 


264  OXFORD    DIVINITV    ANU    THE    SUCCESSION.  [lECT.    XI. 

symbol,  a  time,  a  spot,  may  be  its  property  and  token,  whatever 
be  the  real  difficulty  of  ascertaining  and  discriminating  such 
details ;  nay,  and  it  is  not  fully  developed  till  it  reaches  those 
ultimate  points,  whatever  real  danger  there  be  of  formality." 

Did  this  writer  thus  characterize  "  the  American  church," 
unadvisedly,  or  without  authority  ?  "  We  shall  refer,"  says  he 
as  our  authorities '  "  to  three  bishops  of  their  church  ;  and 
first,  to  the  sermons  of  Dr.  Seabury,  of  Connecticut,  the  first 
consecrated  diocesan  bishop."  Among  other  things.  Bishop 
Seabury  is  made  to  testify  as  to  "  the  holy  eucliarist,"^  "  that 
there  was,  however,  a  great,  and  real  change  made  in  the 
bread  and  the  cup,  by  our  Saviour's  blessing,  and  thanksgiving, 
and  prayer,  cannot  be  doubted." 

"  They  were,  therefore,  by  his  blessing  and  word,  made  to 
be,  what  by  nature  they  were  not." 

"  The  eucharist  is  not  only  a  sacrament,  but  also  a  true  and 
proper  sacrifice,  commemorative  of  the  original  sacrifice  and 
death  of  Christ,  for  our  deliverance  from  sin  and  death," 

"  When  Christ  commanded  his  apostles  to  celebrate  the  holy 
eucharist,  in  remembrance  of  him,  he  with  a  command  gave 
them  power  to  do  so,  that  is,  he  communicated  his  own  priest- 
hood  to  them,  in  such  measure  and  degree,  as  he  saw  necessary 
for  his  church,  to  qualify  them  to  be  his  representatives,  to  of- 
fer the  christian  sacrifice  of  bread  and  wine." 

"The  eucharist  is  also  called  the  communion  of  the  body 
and  blood  of  Christ,  not  only  because,  by  communing  together, 
we  declare  our  mutual  love  and  good-will,  but  also,  because  in 
that  holy  ordinance  we  communicate  with  God,  through  Christ 
the  mediator,  by  first  offering  or  giving  to  him  the  sacred  sym- 
bols of  the  body  and  blood  of  his  dear  Son,  and  then  receiving 
them  again,  blessed,  and  sanctified  by  his  Holy  Spirit,  and  for 
a  principle  of  immortality  to  our  bodies,  as  well  as  to  our 
souls." 

Similar  evidence  is  then  presented  by  the  reviewer,  from 
the  writings  of  Bishop  Hobart  and  Bishop  Dehon.* 

"  The  reviewer,  after  fully  presenting  the  evidence  in  the 
case,  adds,  "such  are  the  principles  of  the  American  church, 
legitimately  resulting  from  her  idea,  as  catholic  and  apos- 
tolic."" 

Not  less  strong  and   conclusive   in  substantiation  of  this  con- 

1)  Ibid,  p  309.  from  him  by  the  critic  requires  some 

2)  Ibid.  p.  310.  torturing  to  speak  forth  the  anti-cath- 

3)  Ibid,  pp.  312- 314.  olic  and    Romish   sentiments,  for  the 

4)  Ibid,  pp.  314- 318.  support  of  which  his  name  is  intro- 
It  is  but  justice  to  this  venerated  duced. 

man  to  say,  that  the  evidence  adduced  5)  P.  318. 


LECT.   XI. j  PREf.ATIi:    1'0P1%KY    AND    THE    SUCCESSIOK.  ^^^O 

nexioii  between  the  doctrine  of  apostolical  succession,  I'.s  their 
basis,  and  the  worst  errors  of  this  whole  system  ;  is  the  tesiimony 
of  the  London  Christian  Observer,  the  o.'gan  of  the  low-church 
episcopalians  in  England.  In  that  work  for  March,  1837,'  it  is 
said,  "  to  their  appalling  invention,  that  the  only  way  of  restora- 
tion, is  through  penance,  or,  as  Professor  Pusey  expresses  it, 
through  '  enduring  pains,  and  abiding  self-discipline,  and  con- 
tinued sorrow,'  so  as  '  again  to  become  capable  of  that  mer- 
cy : ' —  to  their  exaggerations  of  priestly  absolutions,  and  the 
power  of  the  keys,  that  frightful  engine  of  despotism,  the  ful- 
crum of  which,  was  the  doctrine  maintained  in  these  Tracts, 
upon  the  apostolical  authority,  which  every  minister  of  Christ 
still  possesses  to  bind  and  loose,  the  sacraments  being  the  chan- 
nels for  the  conveyance  of  divine  grace,  and  the  priest  who  ad- 
ministers them  having  '  power  over  the  gifts  of  the  Holy  Ghost,' 
*  power  over  the  things  of  the  unseen  world  ; '  a  power  never 
more  arrogantly  assumed  by  Rome  herself,  in  the  madness  of 
her  spiritual  tyrarmy,  when  '  drunken  with  the  blood  of  the 
saints,'  than  in  such  passages  as  the  following,  by  Mr.  New- 
man, Mr.  Keble,  and  Dr.  Pusey,  who  actually  dare  to  write, 
'the  fountain  (of  the  Redeemer's  blood)  has,  indeed,  been 
opened  for  sin  and  uncleanness,'  but  it  were  to  abuse  the  pow- 
er of  the  keys  intrusted  to  us,  (///)  again  (that  is,  after  a  first 
offence)  to  pretend  to  admit  them ;  and  thus  now  there  remains 
only  the  baptism  of  tears  — "  (May  God  forgive  men,  who 
thus  awfully  presume  to  limit  the  virtues  of  the  Redeemer's 
atonement  ;  who  substitute  the  penance  of  tears,  for  the  blood  of 
Christ,  and  who  interpose  between  man  and  his  God,  to  '  admit' 
or  shut  out  from  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  as  they  see  fit,  just  as 
the  popish  priests  did,  to  their  own  pontifical  dignity,  and  great 
gain,  though  of  this  we  accuse  not  the  Oxford  brethren,  till 
Luther  spoiled  Setzel's  trade)  —  to  all  such  presumptuous  fol- 
lies, and  anti-scriptural  dreamings,  our  homilies  reply  as  fol- 
lows," &ic. 

To  this,  we  may  add  the  further  testimony  of  Bishop  Hoadly, 
who,  in  a  work  ironically  dedicated  to  Pope  Clement  XL,  thus 
satirically  notices  these  arrogant  pretensions  of  the  English  cler- 
gy, and  this  very  connexion  upon  which  we  have  been  insist- 
ing. 

"Your  holiness  is  not  aware  how  near  the  churches  of  us  prot- 
estants  have  at  length  come,  to  those  privileges  and  perfections 
which  you  boast  of,  as  peculiar  to  your  own  church.  You  can- 
not err  in  any  thing  you  determine,  and  we  never  do  :  that  is, 

1)  P.  152. 
34 


266  PRELATIC    POPERY    AND    THE    SUCCESSION.  [lECT.  XI. 

in  one  word,  you  are  infallible,  and  we  are  always  in  the  right. 
We  cannot  but  esteem  the  advantaj^e  to  be  exceedingly  on  cur 
side  in  this  case,  because  we  have  all  the  benefiis  of  infallibili- 
ty, without  the  absurdity  of  pretending  to  it.  Authority  results 
as  well  from  power,  as  from  right,  and  a  majority  of  votes  is  as 
strong  a  foundation  for  it,  as  infallibility  itself.  Councils  that 
may  err,  never  do  !! " 

"There  was  no  manner  of  necessity  in  your  church,  to  discard 
the  scriptures,  as  a  rule  of  faith  open  to  all  christians,  and  to 
set  up  the  church  in  distinction  to  tliem.  It  is  but  taking  care, 
in  some  of  our  controversies,  to  fix  upon  the  laity,  that  they 
must  not  abuse  this  right  of  reading  the  scriptures,  by  pretend- 
ing to  be  wiser  than  their  superiors,  and  that  they  must  take 
care  to  understand  particular  texts,  as  the  church  understands 
them,  and  as  their  guides,  (the  clergy,)  who  have  an  interpre- 
tative authority,  explain  them." 

*'  Some  have  changed  the  authoritative  absolution  of  the  Ro- 
mish church,  into  an  authoritative  intercession  of  the  priest, 
who  is  now  become  with  us,  a  mediator  between  God  and  man. 
This  creates  the  same  dependence  of  the  laity,  upon  the 
priests,  and  shows  how  dexterous  we  are  in  changing  words, 
when  there  is  occasion,  without  changing  them  at  all." 

"  As  for  us,  of  the  Church  of  England,  we  have  bishops  in  a 
succession  as  certainly  uninterrupted  from  the  apostles,  as  your 
church  could  communicate  to  us  :  and,  upon  this  bottom,  which 
makes  us  a  true  church,  we  have  a  right  to  separate  from  you, 
but  no  persons  living  have  any  right  to  differ  or  separate  from 
us.  Thus  we  have,  indeed,  left  you,  but  we  have  fixed  our 
selves  in  your  seat,  and  make  no  scruple  to  resemble  you,  in 
our  defences  of  ourselves,  and  censures  of  others,  whenever  we 
think  it  proper."' 

"  The  more  exalted  doctrine,"  says  Professor  Powell,  of  Ox- 
ford, in  his  "Tradition  Unveiled,"*  "  of  sacramental  efficacy, 
of  absolution,  and  of  excommunication,  were  hardly  separable 
from  the  claim  to  the  exclusive  commission  of  apostolic  ordina- 
tion to  administer  them,  and  to  a  continuation  of  the  apostolic 
powers  in  the  episcopal  hierarchy.  All  these  soon  became 
(from  obvious  causes)  integral  parts  of  the  constitution  of  the 
church  :  and  (by  the  aid  of  the  discipUna  arcani)  soon  enjoyed 

])  Archbishop    Wake    was  thus  none  of  them  below  a  deacon,  because 

led  by   antiquity  to  admit  the  claims  we   do  not  read  that  the  apostles  had 

in    part  of  all    the    Romish    orders,  any,  yet  we  acknowledge  the  rest  to 

(Exp.  of  Doct.  of  Eng.  Ch.  in  Oxf.  have  been  anciently  received  in  the 

Tr.  vol.  iii.  p.  153  :)  "  We  maintain  church,  and  shall  not,  therefore,  raise 

the  distinction  of  the  several  orders  any  controversy  about  them." 

in  the  church ;  and  though  we  have  I)  P.  60,  Ox.  1839. 


LECT.    XI.]  PRELATIC    POPERY    AND    THE    SUCCESSION.  267 

the  sanction  of  primitive  tradition.  This  it  was  which  fixed 
the  Jirst  link  in  tl)e  chain  of  the  much-boasted  apostolic  succes- 
sion:  a  point  important  to  be  noticed,  since  the  attention  of 
disputants  on  both  sides  has  been  usually  confined  to  the  very 
subordinate  object  of  tracing  the  subsequent  links,  which  is  a 
mere  question  of  history." 

The  same  writer  further  says:  ''  If  we  look  at  the  influence 
which  the  system  exercises  on  the  multitude  of  its  followers, 
we  shall  perceive  that  it  is  precisely  the  same  kind  as  that  of 
the  Romish  church  ;  and  though  professedly  at  entire  variance 
with  popery  in  a  literal  acceptation,  yet,  in  a  wider  sense,  as 
referring  to  the  ground  and  character  both  of  doctrinal  princi- 
ples and  devotional  and  ecclesiastical  practices,  there  is  that 
community  of  spirit  and  tendency,  which  belongs  to  systems 
alike  claiming  an  absolute  authority  over  the  conscience, 
grounded  on  an  alleged  divine  comn.ission.  And,  in  common 
with  the  system  of  Romanism,  it  maintains  a  powerful  ascend- 
ancy from  appealing  to  the  same,  and  those  some  of  the  most 
prevalent,  weaknesses  of  human  nature.  To  the  many,  impa- 
tient of  inquiry  and  indolently  led  by  the  pretensions  of  author- 
ity, it  holds  forth  the  sufficiency  of  an  implicit  uninquiring 
submission  to  the  decrees  of  the  church  ;  and  to  those  who  are 
anxiously  seeking  some  means  of  satisfying  or  compounding 
with  some  slight  demands  of  conscience,  it  proposes  the  com- 
fortable assurance  of  the  efficacy  of  its  observances  ;  proposi- 
tions wliich  the  mass  of  nominal  believers  will  be  always  viell 
prepared  to  embrace.'" 

To  this  proof  of  our  first  position,  it  is  unnecessary  to  add,  as 
we  might  easily  do,  abundant  testimony  from  other  and  numer- 
ous writings,  as  well  American  as  English.  Indeed,  the  doc- 
trine of  prelatical  succession  being  granted,  we  cannot  see  how 
all  other  doctrines  which  have  gone  forth  from  the  church  as  the 
prophetical  keeper  and  interpreter  of  the  sacred  scriptures,  can 
be  questioned  ;  since  they  are  all  educed  by  an  easy  process, 
from  this  "rudimental  truth,"  and  rest  with  it  upon  the  divine 
authority  of  the  church. 

It  is  only  necessary,  therefore,  in  order  to  establish  the  charge 
of  a  Romish  tendency  in  this  doctrine,  that  we  should  bring 
credible  testimony  from  parties  capable  of  giving  evidence  in  the 
case,  to  the  unquestionable  Romanism  of  this  doctrinal  system." 

1)  Tradition  Unveiled,  p.  9.  beast   associated  with   the  first  beast, 

2)  In  the  Methodist  Quirterly  or  the  Romish  church,  described  in 
Review,  for  Jan.  1(^41,  (see  pp.  ti^-  the  Revelations  of  St.  John,  ch.  xiii. 
Ij2,)  there   is  an   argument  to  show,  11-17. 

that  the  English  church  is  the  other 


268  THE   PRELATIC   DIVINITY    CONFESSEDLY   POPISH.       [lECT.  XI. 

And  here,  truly,  the  only  difficulty  is,  to  select  witnesses  from 
the  gatiiering  multitude,  who  are  all  most  eagerly  pressing  into 
the  service,  and  demanding  a  hearing  for  conscience'  sake. 

Beyond  the  pale  of  this  new  catholic  church,  there  is  one 
unmingled  cry  of  unqualified  condemnation  uttered  against  the 
whole  scheme,  as  heing  necessarily  popish  in  its  innate  propensi- 
ties— its  natural  longings — and  its  ultimate  developements.  With- 
in the  sanctuary  itself,  there  is  the  sound  of  many  voices,  rising 
in  their  tone  of  loud  and  most  bitter  lamentation,  over  the  apos- 
tate tendencies  of  this  semi-papal  system.  The  London  Chris- 
tian Observer,  the  veteran  champion  which  has  contended  for 
pure  and  spiritual  religion,  against  the  host  of  the  assailants,  for 
the  last  thirty  years,  is  heard  from  month  to  month,  proclaiming 
to  the  friends  of  protestantism,  that  "  popery  is  the  ultraism  of 
Oxford  tract  doctrine ;  and  Oxford  tract  doctrine  is  popery  di- 
vested of  its  most  startling  results'"  —  that  it  undoes  the  refor- 
mation—  and  that  if  these  doctrines  prevail,  there  must  be  a 
second  reformation  in  England.  "  It  is,"  says  this  noble  work, 
"  afflicting  beyond  expression,*  to  see  our  protestant  church  — 
and  in  times  like  these — agitated  by  the  revival  of  these  figments 
of  the  darkest  age  of  papal  superstition.  Well  may  popery  flour- 
ish !  well  may  dissent  triumph!  well  may  unitarianism  sneer  I 
well  may  all  protestantism  mourn,  to  see  the  spot  where  Cran- 
mer  and  Latimer  shed  their  blood  for  the  pure  gospel  of  Christ, 
overrun  (yet  not  overrun,  for,  blessed  be  God,  the  infection  is 
not  —  at  least,  so  we  trust  —  widely  spread)  with  some  of  the 
most  vain  and  baneful  absurdities  of  popery."  "  The  whole 
matter,  doctrinal  and  practical,  hangs  together.  It  is  essentially, 
—  are  we  to  have  the  Bible  and  protestantism,  or  the  Missal  and 
popery  ?  "^  "  The  Oxford  tract  divines  just  give  Rome  all  that 
she  asks  as  a  basis  for  the  establishment  of  her  pretensions; 
while  they  undermine  those  principles  on  which  the  protestant 
reformation  was  grounded."* 

The  same  work  for  October,  1838,*  declares,  "  If  indeed  we 
grant  to  Rome  all  that  the  Oxford  tracts  concede,  there  is  so  lit- 
tle left  to  contend  for,  tliat  not  a  few  persons  are  likely  to  follow 
the  example  of  the  lady,  who  being  remonstrated  with  by  Arch- 
bishop Laud,  for  turning  papist,  told  him  that  she  disliked  a 
crowd,  and  as  she  saw  which  way  he  and  his  friends  were  trav- 
elling, she  went  on  first.  The  Roman  catholic  priests  confi- 
dently predict  that  the  Oxford  tract  doctrines  will  afford  power- 

1)  P.  661,  for  1836.  p.  187.  and   Aug.  18^7  and  1838,  pp. 

2)  Ibid  for  1836,  p.  791.  651,711,719,723,749. 

3)  Lond.  Chr.  Obs.  March,  1838,  4)  Ibid,  1838,  p.  820. 

5)  P.  616. 


LECT.  XI.]  PRELATIC    DIVINITY    CONFESSEDLY    POPISH,  269 

ful  aid  in  preparing  the  way  for  the  restoration  of  popery  through- 
out England  and  Ireland,  to  the  subversion  of  the  protestant 
episcopal  church  as  a  national  establishment,  and  its  ultiaiale 
downfall  as  a  religious  communion.  They  are  sanguine,  also, 
as  to  the  general  effect  of  these  doctrines,  in  weakening  the  gen- 
eral cause  of  protestantism  tiirougliout  Christendom." 

The  Episcopal  Recorder  of  Pliiiadelphia,  the  organ  of  congenial 
spirits  in  this  American  zion,  is  heard  echoing  back  the  cry  of 
dani^jer  and  alarm.'  Every  where  there  is  a  stir  in  the  camps  of 
our  brethren.  There  is  a  rushing  to  their  negkcte  I  arms,  and 
a  busy  preparation  for  the  expected  onset.  Already  have  many 
single  and  chosen  combatants,  come  forth  between  the  opposing 
armies,  and  manfully  contended  for  the  faiih  once  delivered  to 
the  saints,  against  this  new  disguise,  under  which  popery  is 
coming  in  upon  us  like  a  flood.  If  we  look  to  England,  we 
recognize  the  noble  bearing  of  her  gallant  bishops  —  John  Bird 
Sumner,  the  bishop  of  Chester^  —  Shutlleworih,  now  bishop  of 
Chichestej-^  —  Daniel  Wilson,  bishop  of  Calcutta,^  —  Archbishop 
Whaleley* — and  the  archbishop  of  Cashel,^  as  they  lead  on  the 
sacramental  host  of  God's  elect. 

There  too  is  that  redoubted  knight,  who  has  made  such  proof 
of  his  literary  prowess,  in  many  a  learned  contest,  the  Rev. 
Georsje  Stanley  Faber,  who  in  his  work  on  primitive  justification, 
has  identified  this  system,  as  it  regards  that  grand  doctrine  of  our 
faith,  with  Romanism.'' 

There  also  may  be  seen  the  Rev.  Mr.  Bickersleth,  who  has 
been  so  eminently  serviceable  by  his  writings  to  the  cause  of 
truth  and  piety,  boldly  proclaiming  the  popery  of  these  divines. ^ 
He  says : — "A  highly  respectable,  learned,  and  devout  class 
of  men  has  arisen  up  at  one  of  our  universities,  the  tendency  of 
whose  writings  is  departure  from  protestantism,  and  approach  to 
papal  doctrine.  They  publish  tracts  for  the  times ;  and  while  they 
oppose  the  most  glaring  part  of  popery  —  the  infallibility  of  the 
pope,  the  worship  of  images,  transubstantialion,  and  the  like  — 
yet,  though  the  spirit  of  the  times  is   marked  by  the  opposite 

1)  We  mifjht,  had  we  room,  give  7)  See  the  Primitive  Doctrine  of 
large  extracts  from  this  pnper.  Justification     Investirrated,   with     an 

2)  Lond.  Chr.  Obs,  183!),  p.  G23,  Appendix    on    Mr.    Newman's    Lec- 
and  in  Popery  of  Oxf  Tr.  p.  9.  lures,  Lond.  1839,  2d  ed.  and  as  quot- 

3)  Ibid,  1840, p.  (i40.  and  his  work  ed  in   Mcllvaine  on   Oxf  Div.  cli.  ii. 
on  Tradition,  Lond.  1839,  3d  edit.  p  49,  and   in  his  Letter  to   the  editor 

4)  Charge  deUvered  to  his  clergy  of  "  The  Churchman,"  from  a  per- 
in  July,  1838.  sonal  communication. 

.5)    Dangers     to    the    Christian  8)   See  Lond.  Chr.  Obs.  1836,  p. 

Faith.  Lond.  1839.  775. 

6)  Lond.  Chr.  Obs.  June,  1838, 
p.  393. 


270 


PRELATIC   DIVINITY    CONFESSEDLV   POPISH.  [LBCT.    XI. 


fault,  the  very  principles  of  popery  are  brought  forward  by  them, 
UDciercieftMence  to  human  authority,  especially  that  of  the  fathers, 
the  christian  ministry  and  the  sacraments;  and  undervaluing 
justification  by  faith.  With  much  learning  and  study  of  the 
fathers;  with  great  apparent,  and  doubtless  in  some  cases  real, 
devotion  ;  and  adevotedness  ascetic  and  peculiar;  they  seem  to 
the  author,  as  far  as  he  has  seen  and  known  their  course,  to  open 
another  door  to  that  land  of  darkness  and  shadow  of  death,  where 
the  man  of  sin  reigns." 

In  this  judgment  the  British  Critic,  before  it  had  become 
fully  committed  as  it  now  is,  to  this  system,  was  heard  also  con- 
^  curring.' 

Nor  have  there  been  wanting  many  right-hearted  men,  who 
have  heard  the  cry  of  their  endangered  Zion,  and  rushed  forward 
to  her  rescue.  Already  has  the  press  teemed  with  reviews,  pro- 
tests, and  larger  works,  unmasking  the  concealed  popery  of  these 
divines,  exposing  their  crafty  steahhiness  —  and  unbaring  their 
insidious  treachery  against  the  protestantism  of  the  English 
church." 


1)  See  No.  G7,  p.  89,  for  July, 
1838,  and  in  Mcllvuine  on  Oxf.  Div. 
p.  53. 

2)  Among  these  we  would  notice 
the  following  Works:  1.  Oxford 
Tracts  Unmasked,  by  Rev.  Miles 
Jackson,  of  Leeds  ;  2.  Essays  on  the 
Churcli,  by  a  Layman,  a  new  ed.  with 
some  observations  on  existing  circum- 
st!inces  and  dangers ;  3.  Nolan's 
Catholic  Character  of  Christianity, 
as  recognized  by  the  Reformed 
Church,  in  opposition  to  the  corrupt 
Traditions  of  the  Church  of  Rome; 
4.  Hook  s  Cull  to  Union  Answered, 
Lond.  1839,7th  ed. ;  5.  The  Popery 
of  the  Oxford  Tracts  Developed, 
Lond.  183!);  C.  The  Listener  at  Ox- 
ford, by  Caroline  Fay.  See  her  very 
strong  exposure  of  the  popery  of  its 
divines,  at  pp.  27,  3i),  48,  170,  173; 
7.  Powell's  Essay  on  ihe  Apostolical 
Succession  ;  8.  Episcopacy,  Tradition 
and  the  Sacrann-nts,  considered  in 
reference  to  the  Oxford  Tracts,  by  the 
Rev.  Wm.  Fitzgerald,  Dublin;  9. 
Ancient  Christianity,  by  Isaac  Tay- 
lor, vol.  i.  published,  and  vol.  ii.  in 
progress;  lb.  Holden  on  the  Author- 
ity of  Tradition  in  Matters  of  Relig 
ion,  Lond.  1838:  11.  The  Popery  of 
Oxford,  by  the  Rev.  P.  Maurice, 
Chaplain  of  New  and  All  Soul's  Col- 
lege ;  12.  A  Letter  to  the  Right  Rev. 
Father  in  God,  Richard,  Lord  Bishop 
of  Oxford,  containing  Strictures  upon 


certain  parts  of  Dr.  Pusey's  Letter  to 
his  Lordship.  By  a  Clergyman  of 
the  diocese,  and  a  resident  member  of 
the  university  ;  13.  Observations  on 
Mr.  Keble's  Sermon  on  Tradition,  by 
the  Rev.  T.  Butt;  14.  The  Oxford 
Tract  System  considered  in  reference 
to  reserve  in  preaching  By  the  Rev. 
C.  S.  Bird  ;  15. This  charge  is  also  fully 
urged  against  Mr.  Manning,  another 
coadjutor  of  these  divines,  by  "  Cleri- 
cus  Cistriensisj"  who  enumerates, 
among  the  Romish  features  of  his 
argumentation,  "  the  same  ideal  vis- 
ion of  unity,  not  of  faith  and  love 
and  holiness,  but  of  a  specifs  of 
GENEALOGICAL  DESCENT  aiid  sacerdo- 
tal  orders,  as  essential  to  a  gospel 
church."  Lond.  Chr.  Obs.  A  p.  1839, 
p.  222  ;  16.  See  also  the  Summary  of 
Dr.  George  Miller's  Charges  in  his 
Letter  to  Dr  Pusey,  p.  70,  &c.  See  tliis 
fullv  argued  in  the  Review  of  Tracts 
for 'the "Times,  No.  90,  Edinb.  Rev. 
April,  1841,  p.  146. 

Testimonies  against  the  jiopery 
of  these  doctrines  are  given  in  tlie 
Tract  on  this  subject,  (Lond.  1839,) 
from  Dr.  Fawcett,  Margaret  Professor 
of  Divinity,  Oxford;  J.  H.Browne, 
archdeacon  of  Ely,  and  lite  felluw  of 
St.  John's  College,  Cambridire  ;  the 
Rev.  H.  McNeile. of  Liverpool  ;  Rev. 
H.  Stowell,  Minister  of  Christ's 
Church,  Salford  ;  Rev.  James  Schol- 
field,    Regius    Professor    of    Greek, 


LECT.  XI.]  FKELATIC    DIVINITY    COMFESSEULY    POPISH. 


271 


Most  nobly,  too,  have  our  own  American  bishops,  Aloore,' 
JNIcIlvaine^  and  Meade,3  unfurled  the  banner  of  Christ's  pure 
gospel,  and  proclaitned  eternal  warfare  against  this  Romisli  sys- 
tem of  Oxford  divinity. 

But  overwhelming  as  is  this  array  of  testimony,  in  substan- 
tiation of  the  charge  of  a  popish  tendency,  against  the  system 
maintained  by   the   Oxford   divines,  —  there   is   one  remaining 


Cambridge;  and  the  Rev.  George 
Townsend,  Prebendary  of  Durham. 
See  also  the  testitnony  of  the  Rev. 
James  Graham,  curate  of  the  cathe- 
dral, Lonilonderry,  in  Presb.  Def.  p. 
132  ;  of  Sir  Thomas  Bloomfield,in  his 
Introduction  to  Meade's  Sermon,  pp. 
38,  39  ;  of  Sir  Jolin  Sinclair  in  Report 
of  the  Edinburgh  Celebration,  p.  14. 
The  clergy  of  ihe  diocese  of  Ardagh, 
Ireland,  specially  convened  Dec. 
1838,  unanimously  protested  against 
these  Oxford  divines.  See  in  Presb. 
Def  p.  170.  See  also  an  Address  to 
the  Clergy  of  Bath,  by  a  large  body 
of  lay  members  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land, in  which  their  popery  is  strong- 
ly exhibited.  Record,  Newsp.  Feb. 
1840,  and  Plea  for  Presb.  p.  4r>6. 

The  same  charge  has  been  urged 
against  this  system  by  the  leading 
journals  and  newspapers  in  England 
and  Ireland,  including  the  London 
Times,  by  the  Edinburgh  and  all  the 
dissenting  periodicals,  and  by  almost 
the  whole  religious  press  in  this  coun- 
try, including  the  Epis.  Recorder. 

See  also  the  testimonies  of  Dr 
Clark,  of  Philadelphia,  the  Rev,  Jo 
siah  Pratt  and  Mr.  Bickersteth,  in  Mr. 
Boardman's  Letters  to  Bishop  Doane, 
Phil.  1841,  p.  22.  See  also  the  very 
strong  declarations  of  the  Rev.  Dr. 
Beaseley,  in  ibid,  p.  24.  See  also 
Archbishop  Whateley's  additional 
testimony  in  a  late  charge,  in  ibid.  p. 
48.  Also,  Mr.  Boardman's  very  able 
Letter  to  Bishop  Doane  in  the  Pres- 
byterian. 

"At  the  late  meeting  of  the  Epis- 
copal Convention  in  Virginia,"  says 
the  N.  Y.  Observer,  "one  subject  of 
general  interest  was  discussed,  —  the 
Oxford  Tracts.  It  was  probably  intro- 
duced with  such  promptitude,  that  a 
full  and  explicit  vote  might  be  had  on 
the  matter  at  tne  earliest  period.  The 
debate  arose  on  the  report  of  the  com- 
mittee on  the  state  of  religion,  of 
which  Dr.  Empie  of  Richmond  was 
chairman.     The   committee,   in   this 


report,  speak  with  entire  decision 
on  the  subject  of  the  Tracts,  '  not  only 
do  we  disi  liiim  all  sympathy  with 
them,  but  we  denounce  them  as  pop- 
ery in  disguise  ;'  this,  1  think,  is  the 
lantTuage  used,  and  )-ou  will  admit  it 
to  be  sufficiently  clear.  One  member 
appeared  to  advocate  the  other  side  of 
the  question ;  and  one,  though  he  did 
not  advocate  it,  was  not  prepared  to 
adopt  what  he  considered  the  severe 
language  of  the  committee  s  report. 
But  when  the  vote  was  taken  on  the 
acceptance  of  the  report,  it  was  car- 
ried without  alteration,  and,  I  believe, 
with  entire  unanimity.  This  result, 
embodying,  as  it  may  fairly  be  pre- 
sumed to  do,  the  public  sentiment  of 
the  episcopal  church  in  Virginia  upon 
Oxfordism,  no  doubt  created  much 
pleasure  in  the  bosoms  of  the  bishops, 
one  of  whom.  Bishop  Meade,  has  re- 
cently published  a  work  in  defence  of 
the  truth  against  these  errors." 

1)  The  venerable  Bishop  Moore, 
is  reported,  in  the  Episcopal  Record- 
er, to  have  exhorted  his  clergy,  at  the 
late  Virginia  convention,  to  give  no 
place,  nor  countenance,  no  not  for  an 

hour,  to  THESE  ABOMINATIONS  OF  POP- 

ERV,  issuintr  from  Oxford,  —  I  say 
abominations  of  popery,  for  I  verily 
believe  that  the  very  worst  elements 
of  that  system  are  insidiously  wrapped 
up  in  these   writings.'' 

2)  See  Oxf  Divinity  compared 
with  that  of  the  Romish  and  Anglican 
Churches,  jfec.  Phil.  1841,  p.  546;  a 
work  of  great  power,  as  may  be  seen 
from  the  fact,  that  no  one  has  yet  had 
courage  enough  to  grapple  with  it,  in 
any  fair  trial  of  its  strength.  This 
system  Bishop  Mcllvaine  calls  "  pop- 
ery restrained."  Oxf  Divinity,  p. 
12.  See  also  pp.  14,  17.  32, 132,'  175 
263,  525.  .507,  533,  537. 

3)  See  a  chapter  on  these  testi- 
monies to  this  subject  in  Bp.  .Meade's 
Sermon  at  the  Consecration  of  Bishop 
Elliott.  Appendix,  ch.  xv.  p.  116,  «fec. 


272  PRELATIC    DIVINITY    EMBRACED    BY    ROMANISTS.^  [lECT.  XI. 

source  of  evidence  which  must  put  the  matter  at  rest,  with  all 
impartial  persons.  That  this  system  harmonizes,  very  essen- 
tially, witli  Romanism,  is  the  unequivocal  judgment  of  Roman- 
ists themselves. 

And  first,  let  Dr.  Wiseman  and  his  coadjutors,  in  the  Dublin 
Quarterly  Review,  be  heard  in  evidence.  "  We  see,'"  say 
they,  "  learned  and  zealous,  and  we  have  reason  to  believe, 
in  some  instances,  amiable  men,  contending  in  the  spirit 
uhich  belongs  to  a  better  church,  and  a  better  cause,  in  lavor 
of  a  rigid  adherence  to  principles  and  doctrines  which  we  must 
approve  ;  yet,  thereby,  departing  from  the  consistency  of  their 
professed  faith,  and  betraying  how  powerless  they  are,  in  wield- 
ing the  weapons  whicli  it  has  long  since  blunted,  and  then  thrown 
aside." 

"  This  tendency  of  the  party  at  Oxford,  to  run  into  catholic 
principles  for  shelter,  has  necessarily  attracted  the  attentii)n  of 
many." 

"  Nothing  can  be  more  clear,  than  that  in  the  established 
church,  there  has  been  a  series  of  learned  divines,  whose  opin- 
ions approximated  greatly  to  those  of  catholics  ;  who  thought 
that  the  reformation,  however  necessary,  over-did  its  work." 

"  No  one,  we  believe,  save  themselves,  will  maintain  that 
they  represent  the  English  church,  such  as  the  reformation  in- 
tended it  to  appear,  in  harsh  and  unyielding  contrast  to  the 
catiiolic  doctrine  on  the  subject." 

Let  us  now  hear  the  testimony  of  the  Romish  journal,  pub- 
lished at  Rome,  as  quoteil  by  the  author  of  Ancient  Christian- 
ity.* "  The  attention  of  all  good  catholics,  and  especially  of 
the  congregation  for  the  propagation  of  the  faith,  cannot  be 
enough  excited  by  the  present  state  of  religion,  in  England,  in 
consequence  of  the  new  doctrine,  propagated  with  so  much 
ability  and  success,  by  Messrs.  Newman,  Pusey  and  Keble, 
with  arguments,  drawn  from  the  holy  fathers,  of  which  they 
have  just  undertaken  a  new  edition,  (translation,)  in  English. 
These  gentlemen  labor  to  restore  the  ancient  catholic  liturgy  — 
the  breviary,  (which  many  of  them,  to  the  knowledge  of  the 
writer,  recite  daily,)  fastings,  the  monastic  life,  and  many  other 
religious  practices.  Moreover,  they  teach  the  insufficiency  of  the 
Bible,  as  a  rule  of  faith  —  the  necessity  of  tradition,  and  of  ec- 
clesiastical authority  —  the  real  presence —  prayers  for  the  dead 
—  the  use  of  images  —  the  priest's  power  of  absolution  —  the 
sacrifices  of  the  mass  —  the  devotion  to  the  Virgin,  and  many 

1)  Lond.  Chr.  Obs.  1838,  p.  822.      bile  avoicinamento  fra  protestanti  alle 

2)  Vol.    i.  p.  406,  in  a  passage      dotrine  Cattolicne. 
deiignated  in   the    contents,  —  Mua- 


LECT.  XI.]    PRELATIC    DIVINITY    EMBRACED    BY    ROMANISTS.  273 

Other  catholic  doctrines,  in  such  sort  as  to  leave  but  little  differ- 
ence between  their  opinions,  and  the  true  faith,  and  which  dif- 
ference becomes  less  and  less,  every  day.  Faithful !  redouble 
your  prayers,  that  these  happy  dispositions  may  be  increased  !  " 

To  these  testimonies,  we  would  only  further  add  that  of 
John,  Bishop  of  Charleston,  or  as  given  in  the  Catholic  Mis- 
cellany, and  therefore,  we  presume,  sanctioned  by  him.' 

"  Our  protestant  American  readers  will  be  astonished  to  learn 
that  an  English  protestant  bishop,  the  Right  Rev.  Dr.  Mant, 
has  devoted  some  of  his  leisure  hours  to  no  less  an  extraordi- 
nary task  than  translating  the  hymns  of  the  Roman  breviary, 
used  by  the  catholic  clergy,  into  elegant  and  vigorous  English, 
we  presume,  '  for  the  use  of  the  law-established  church.' 
Such,  however,  is  the  fact;  and  a  selection  of  his  'Roman 
Hymns,'  published  by  Rivington,  of  London,  and  copied  into 
the  English  Catholic  Directory,  now  lies  before  us.  This  is 
another  of  the  signs  of  the  times,  (of  which  the  Pusey  tracts 
were  the  earliest,)  proving  that  an  extensive  and  most  extraor- 
dinary movement  towards  the  ancient  religion  is  in  progress  in 
Great  Britain. 

'  A  straw  will  show 
How  the  wind  doth  blow.' 

And  here  is  a  whole  sheaf  of  them.  The  learned  doctors  of 
the  protestant  English  universities  are  devoting  their  talents  to 
illustrating  the  dogmas  of  the  catholic  church.  English  prot- 
estant laymen,  of  every  grade,  are  daily  adding  to  her  num- 
bers ;  and  lastly,  and  certainly  not  least  wonderful,  is  this  new 
evidence  of  her  influence  —  a  prelate  of  the  church  establish- 
ment can  find  no  work  so  con2:enial  to  his  taste  as  rendering  into 
the  popular  tongue  her  ceremonial  hymns,  which  have  been  bit- 
terly abused  by  many  ignorant  and  bigoted  writers  of  his  own 
communion.  If  it  were  simply  a  love  for  this  kind  of  compo- 
sition, and  not  for  the  particular  songs  in  question,  that  induced 
the  good  bishop  to  undertake  the  business,  Sternhold  and  Hop- 
kins left  him  work  enough  behind,  upon  the  Psalms  of  David, 
to  have  occupied  a  life-time.  But  the  fact  must  be  confessed, 
there  is  latterly  a  dangerous  but  irresistible  fascination  in  every 
thing  popish,  for  the  doctors  and  dignitaries  of  the  English 
church.  The  establishment  which  resisted  the  radical  batter- 
ing-ram is  giving  way  under  their  disaffection,  and  her  weeping 
friends  may  now  exclaim  with  Berenger :  — 

'  For  the  last  shot  that  pierced  her  purple  pall, 
Who  but  the  rause  of  song  the  charge  supplied.' 

1)  Number  for  March  14,  1840. 
35 


274 


PRELATIC    DIVINITY    EMBRACED    BY    ROMANISTS.    [lECT.  XI. 


"  We  extract  one  of  the  hymns  as  an  evidence  of  the  perfect 
faithfulness  with  which  the  observances  of  tlie  cathoHc  church 
are  preserved  and  insisted  upon  in  this  version  of  the  protestant 
bishop.'"     But  for  the  present  we  conclude. 


I)  The  following  additional  tes- 
timony, from  the  Catholic  Magazine 
for  1839,  (pp.  165,  179,  in  Lond.  Chr. 
Obs.  Feb.  1841,  p.  79,)  may  be  added 
as  a  Note  :  "  Most  sincerely  and  un- 
affectedly do  we  tender  our  congratu- 
lations to  our  brethren  of  Oxford,  that 
their  eyes  have  been  opened  to  the 
evils  of  private  judgment,  and  the 
consequent  necessity  of  curbing  its 
multiform  extravagance.  It  has  been 
given  them  to  see  the  dangers  of  the 
ever-shifting  sands  of  the  desert,  in 
which  they  were  lately  dwelling,  and 
to  strike  their  tents,  and  flee  the  per- 
ils of  the  wilderness.  They  have  al- 
ready advanced  a  great  way  on  their 
return  towards  that  church,  within 
whose  walls  the  wildest  imagination 
is  struck  with  awe,  and  sobered  down 
to  a  holy  calm,  in  the  enjoyment  of 
which  it  gladly  folds  its  wearied 
wings,  &c.  They  have  found  the 
clue,  which, if  ihey  have  perseverance 
to  follow  it,  will  lead  them  safely 
through  the  labyrinth  of  error  into  the 
clear  day  of  truth.  Some  of  the 
brightest  ornaments  of  their  church 
have  advocated  a  reunion  with  the 
church  of  all  times  and  all  lands ;  and 
the  accomplishment  of  the  design,  if 
we  have  read  aright  the  '  signs  of  the 
times,'  is  fast  ripening.  Her  mater- 
nal arms  are  ever  open  to  receive  back 
repentant  children;  and,  as  when  the 
prodigal  son  returned  to  his  father's 
liouse,  the  fatted  calf  was  killed,  and 
a  great  feast  of  joy  made,  even  so  will 
the  whole  of  Cljristendom  rejoice 
greatly,  when  so  bright  a  body  of 
learned  and  pious  men,  as  the  authors 


of 'Tracts  for  the  Times,'  shall  have 
made  the  one  step  necessary  to  place 
them  again  within  that  sanctuary, 
where  alone  they  can  be  safe  from  the 
moving  sands,  beneath  which  they 
dread  being  overwhelmed.  The  con- 
sideration of  this  step  will  soon  inevi- 
tably come  on  ;  and  it  is  with  the  ut- 
most confidence,  that  we  predict  the 
accession  to  our  ranks  of  the  entire 
mass." 

At  a  late  meeting  for  repeal, 
the  Rev.  Mr.  Hughes,  a  catholic 
priest,  is  reported  to  have  said  ;  "  Are 
protestants  aware  of  the  fact,  that, 
out  of  fifteen  thousand  protestant 
clergymen  in  the  Church  of  England, 
eleven  thousand  are  now  profes- 
sing the  catholic  doctrines  of  Dr. 
Pusey  in  the  university  of  Oxford.'' 
Dr.  Pusey  and  the  Oxford  pro- 
fessors of  divinity,  together  with  the 
great  bulk  of  the  Church-of-Eng- 
land  clergy,  have  clearly  seen  the 
Church  of  England  was  in  danger, 
and  rapidly  falling,  and  would 
no  longer  be  perpetuated  by  any 
other  means,  except  by  establishing 
as  close  and  proximate  affinity  as 
possible  between  its  doctrines  and 
those  of  catholicity,  which  have  with- 
stood the  persecutions  and  various 
stratagems  and  efforts  of  eighteen 
centuries  to  destroy  them.  I  hold 
in  my  possession  the  works  of  Dr. 
Pusey,  and  were  I  to  be  concerned  in 
a  discussion  on  religion,  I  would  not 
desire  to  be  furnished  with  better 
works,  replete  with  catholic  authori- 
ties, and  catholic  arguments,  than  the 
writings  of  Dr.  Pusey." 


ADDITIONAL   NOTES  TO  LECTURE  ELEVENTH. 


NOTE  A. 

"  Oxford  Tractarians. — The  line  of  defence  now  taken  by  some  of  the  partial 
friends  of  the  Oxford  tractarians,"  says  the  London  Record,  "is  this:  — 
'  Though  they  may  be  wrong  in  some  things,  they  have  yet  done  great  service 
in  reviving  important  truths  long  neglected.'  A  more  correct  statement  of  the 
case  would  be  this :  — '  Though  they  have  been  right  in  some  things,  (and 
what  heresiarchs  have  not  been  ?)  they  yet  have  done  immense  mischief  in 
reviving  pernicious  errors  long  exploded  by  all  true  protestants.'  We,  in  fact, 
know  of  no  single  truth,  which  may  be  viewed  as  a  gospel  truth,  which  these 
writers  have  revived  :  but  we  know  of  many  errors,  and  those  of  the  most 
deleterious  kind,  which  they  have  brought  forward  anew,  rendered  plausible 
by  a  great  show  of  learning,  and  circulated  through  the  country  to  the  confu- 
sion of  minds  of  unstable  men. 

"  We  consider  their  case  a  very  awful  one.  They  occupy  respectable  stations. 
They  are  connected  with  a  university  of  high  repute  in  the  literary  world. 
They  themselves  have  acquired  the  name  of  being  learned,  and  this,  certainly 
to  the  full  extent  of  what  they  are  entitled.  And  they  have  also  added  to  these 
advantages,  by  maintaining  a  conduct  strictly  moral,  and  unusually  devout, 
and  marked  with  a  considerable  degree  of  austerity.  Possessing  all  these 
sources  of  influence,  they  employ  all  their  talents  and  all  their  energies,  in 
opposition,  as  we  firmly  believe,  to  the  interest  of  true  spiritual  religion,  and 
in  behalf  of  that  which  is  formal  and  spurious.  To  neglect  advantages  for 
doing  good,  incurs  no  small  guilt ;  but  to  employ  them  for  doing  mischief, 
incurs  a  much  higher  guilt.  May  they  see  the  error  of  their  way,  lament  the 
evils  they  have  done,  and  henceforth  employ  their  time  and  their  talents  in 
counteracting  and  neutralizing  their  effects! 

"Another  thing  maintained  in  their  behalf  by  some  of  those  who  are  partially 
their  friends,  is,  that  they  are  most  unjustly  accused  of  being  Jesuits  or  papists. 
That  they  are  really  either  one  or  the  other  under  disguise,  is  what  we  never 
believed,  though  it  has  been  thought  by  some  that  there  are  individuals  of  this 
character  belonging  to  the  party.  However  this  may  be,  it  is  certain  that  they 
bear  a  nearer  resemblance  to  Jesuits  and  papists  than  to  any  of  the  consistent 
maintainers  of  the  principles  of  the  reformation.  Who  can  read  poor  Froude's 
Remains,  without  seeing  that  he  was  far  more  satisfied  with  the  main  principles 
of  the  Church  of  Rome  than  with  those  of  the  Church  of  England  ?  And  all 
that  has  been  advanced  by  papists  against  scripture  and  in  favor  of  tradition, 
has  been  advanced  by  these  divines,  and  that  with  all  the  subtilty  and  plausible 
learning  of  the  Jesuits.  Every  one  acquainted  with  the  subject  knows  that 
that  there  is  nothing  new  in  what  they  have  brought  forward  either  on  this,  or 
on  high-church  principles  generally  :  the  whole  has  been  fetched  out  of  the 
exuberant  stores  of  popery.  In  the  controversies  at  the  reformation  may  be 
found  all  the  arguments  now  employed;  but  vwst  of  them,  it  will  be  noted, 
were  employed  by  the  papists  against  our  reformers  ;  and  not  by  the  reformers 
against  the  papists.  How,  then,  can  any  be  blamed  for  calling  these  divines 
papists,  since  they  themselves  have  mainly  adopted  their  principles,  and  are 
constantly  employing  their  arguments  ?  JSesides,  have  nol  papists  themselves 
recognized  them  as  friends,  as  the  active  and  efficient  promoters  ol'  the  funda- 


276  NOTE    TO    LECTURE    XI. 

mental  principles  of  their  system  ?  They  are  hailed  in  this  country  by  Romish 
priests  ;  they  are  hailed  in  Ireland  by  Romish  writers  in  reviews ;  yea,  they 
are  hailed  even  at  Rome  as  harbingers  of  good,  as  the  advocates  and  defenders 
of  tiiose  principles  which  cannot  fail  eventually,  if  they  gain  ground,  to  lead  to 
the  re-establishriient  of  popery  in  this  country." 

"  T/ic  Popery  of  Oxford. — It  is  a  question  considerably  canvassed,"  says  the 
London  (Episcopal)  Record,  "  to  what  extent  Puseyism  or  tractarianism  prevails 
among  us.  But  wherever  the  truth  lies  in  relation  to  its  actual  extent,  there  is 
no  question  that  it  occupies  a  much  greater  space  than  hitherto  in  the  public 
eye.  Not  confined  to  the  clergy,  it  occupies  the  attention  of  the  laity;  not 
shut  up  in  the  halls  of  Oxford,  or  confined  to  the  columns  of  '  the  tracts,'  it 
engages  the  attention  of  the  legislature,  it  is  a  chief  subject  in  magazines  and 
reviews,  and  even  occupies  with  eager  discussion  the  columns  of  the  news- 
paper press. 

"  Representations  are  given  on  the  one  hand,  fitted,  we  think,  to  enlarge  it 
beyond  its  due  dimensions,  and  others  are  offered  calculated  to  reduce  it  within 
limits  beyond  which  it  really  expatiates.  Let  it  be  remembered,  also,  as  an 
important  paint  of  the  case,  that  it  exercises  also  a  very  important  influence 
on  society  and  the  church,  even  where  its  principles  and  practices  in  their 
giossness  are  not  received. 

"  To  attempt  to  judge  of  it,  as  we  have  seen  done,  by  estimating  the  number 
of  the  London  clergy  who  have  bowed  their  neck  to  the  yoke,  will  not  lead  to 
a  just  conclusion.  It  is  said,  that  not  one  medical  man  who  had  reached  the 
age  of  forty,  at  the  time  of  Harvey's  discovery  of  the  circulation  of  the  blood, 
ever  received  the  truth  ;  and  it  is  not  to  be  expected  that  men  of  the  mature 
age  of  the  London  clergy  generally,  should  ha^tily  give  in  to  new  dogmas  of 
this  description.  We  suspect  the  direct  power  and  influence  are  chiefly  dis- 
cernible among  the  younger  clergy  —  among  men  at  that  unripe  age,  when  it 
is  diflicult  for  tlie  mind  to  distinguish  between  truth  and  falsehood,  to  separate 
the  precious  from  the  vile,  and  when  the  influence  of  names  and  office  and 
learning,  real  or  assumed,  exercise  a  prodigious  effect  in  the  formation  of  opin- 
ions. And  its  direct  influence,  we  have  no  doubt,  is  very  great  indeed,  in 
drawing  up  the  greater  proportion  of  the  clergy,  including  no  inconsiderable 
part  of  the  beiicli  of  bishops,  to  higher  church  principles  than  those  they  pre- 
viously held,  than  which  there  cannot  be  a  more  captivating  allurement  for 
corrupt  human  nature. 

"  But  to  whatever  extent  Puseyism  has  hitherto  prevailed,  we  have  reached 
the  state  of  mind  not  to  be  greatly  surprised  though  it  had  gained  a  tenfold 
higher  point  than  we  think  it  has  hitherto  reached.  It  is  in  its  essential  prin- 
ciple the  religion  of  nature,  as  that  stands  opposed  to  the  righteousness  of  God, 
and  all  men,  till  they  are  truly  taught  from  above  (except  where  early  evan- 
gelical training  has  wrought  speculatively  into  the  mind,  correct  doctrinal 
truth,)  will,  as  earthy,  cleave  to  that  which  is  earthy,  and  reject  the  spiritual,  to 
discern  which  they  have  no  appropriate  sense.     (1  Cor.  ii.  14.)  *         * 

"  They  [the  Oxford  writers]  have  got  anolher  gospel,  far  more  obviously  and 
palpably  so,  than  that  embraced  by  the  ancient  Galalian  church.  In  principle 
they  are  resting  on  works  equally  with  the  Romish  apostacy.  They  deny  this, 
of  course,  as  boldly  as  Rome  denies  it;  but  this  does  not  alter  the  case.  No 
doubt  many  of  tlit-m  decry  this  and  that  thing  in  Rome.  No  doubt  two  recent 
articles  in  the  Quarterbj  Review,  justly  attributed,  we  have  no  doubt,  to  Pro- 
fessor Sewell,  contain  an  elaborate  and  able  attack  on  popery,  exhibiting  the 
danger  of  some  of  its  principles,  and  of  many  of  its  machinations,  to  the  peace 
and  security  of  the  state, and  tothesafetij  of  that  branch  of  the  church  of  which  he 
is  a  member.  And  it  is  asked,  how  is  this  fact  consistent  with  the  principles  of 
Puseyism  being  naturally  the  same  with  those  of  popery  ?  The  answer  is  at 
hand.  The  leading  and  fundamental  principles  of  their  theology  may  be  mate- 
rially one,  while  in  ilsdevelopenient  in  religious  observances,  popery  may  have 
sunk  into  practices  not  necessarily  arising  from  its  fundamental  unscriptural 
principles,  and  adopted  also  designs  of  universal  empire,  which,  though  appro- 
))riately  following  from  her  theological  dogmas,  and  hostile  to  the  civil  and 
relinfious  liberties  of  the  world,  are  again  not  necessarily  connected  with  her 
fundamental  departure,  in  principle,  fi-om  the  truth  of  the  gospel.  The  tracta- 
rians  and  Rome  may  differ  from  one  another,  in  these  matters,  consistently 


NOTE    TO    LECTURE     XI.  277 

with  both  of  them  being  opposed  to  the  fundamental  principlt'sof  our  apostolic 
church,  of  our  great  reformers,  and  of  tlie  revelation  of  God  to  mankind. 

"  Puseyism,  then,  is  an  unhealthy  life  which  has  originated  in  the  church, 
dissipating  the  spiritual  sleep  in  which  multitudes  of  her  members  lay  envel- 
oped. They  have  awoke  to  action,  but  they  have  not  awoke  to  truth.  They 
are  teaching  men,  but  it  is  not  the  gospel  of  Christ,  but  another  gospel  which 
they  teach.  We  again  refer  those  who  doubt  this  fact,  and  who  have  any 
glimpse  of  the  essential  nature  of  the  gospel  of  Christ,  to  professor  Pusey's 
elaborated  Treatise  on  Baptism,  in  the  second  volume  of  the  Tracts  for  the 
Times.  The  diS'erence  produced  by  the  change  we  see  is  this,  instead  of  men 
being  left  alone  in  a  state  of  religious  indifference,  they  are  roused  to  action 
in  a  wrong  direction. 

"From  such  defenders  of  our  church,  may  God  in  his  mercy  deliver  us. 
What  we  want  for  our  security  is,  that  the  voice  from  the  pulpit  may  concur 
with  the  voice  from  the  desk;  —  that  the  trumpet  from  both  may  have  one 
sound  ;  it  will  then  be  no  '  uncertain  '  one,  but  in  accordance  with  the 
word  of  God. 

"  The  Puseyites  desire  another  teacher  than  the  word  of  God,  and  accord- 
ingly they  bring  forward  another  witness  to  the  truth,  '  antiquitv,'  and  place 
it  on  the  same  level.  It  is  '  scripture  a«^Z  antiquity'  whicli  constitute  their 
rule  of  faith. 

"  This  prop  is  indispensably  necessary  for  their  system.  To  make  it  stand 
they  m\ist  have  another  witness.  Rome,  agreeing  witli  them  in  this,  proceeds 
a  step  further,  and  shuts  from  the  eyes  of  the  church  the  original  and  only 
true  witness. 

"  Puseyism,  in  fact,  is  but  a  revived  form  of  opposition  to  the  gospel.  Spir- 
itual sleep  as  surely  leads  men  to  eternal  ruin  as  a  perversion  of  the  gospel  can 
<lo.  While,  then,  we  are  distressed  with  the  progress  of  Puseyism,  let  us  not 
be  so  distressed  as  if  it  had  supplanted  what  was  previously  good.  It  may 
have  done  so  in  some  few  instances,  but  it  may  be  accompanied  with  good 
fully  counterbalancing  this  evil  It  is  in  some  respects  well  to  awaken  men  to 
attention  to  religion,  however  erroneous  the  teaching.  If,  in  God's  mercjy, 
the  heart  gets  engaged,  it  will,  sooner  or  later,  be  perceived  that  *  the  bed  is 
shorter  than  that  a  man  can  stretch  himself  on  it,  and  the  covering  narrower 
than  that  he  can  wrap  himself  in  it.'  Finding  no  rest  to  their  souls  there,  they 
may  be  led  to  seek  '  a  more  excellent  Wtiy.' 

"  Let  us  all  remember  this  word,  when  we  are  deposed  to  think  that  some 
strange  thing  has  happened  to  us,  'there  mus^t  needs  be  heresies  amono-  us, 
that  they  that  are  approved  may  be  made  manifest;  '  and  let  us  also  remember 
that  the  leading  scriptural  method  of  supplanting  all  heresy,  is  with  redoubled 
diligence  to  '  preach  Christ  crucified,  to  the  Jews  a  stumbling-block,  and  to 
t^ie  Greeks  foohshness,  but  to  them  that  are  called,  whether  Jews  or  Greeks, 
Christ  the  power  of  God,  and  the  wisdom  of  God.'  " 


LECTURE   XII. 


THE      PRELATICAL      DOCTRINE     OF     APOSTOLICAL     SUCCESSION     ESSEN- 
TIALLY   POPISH    IN    ITS    TENDENCY    AND    RESULTS. 

THE     SUBJECT     CONCLUDED. 

Having  in  the  preceding  lecture  fully  established  our  posi- 
tion, first,  that  the  dogmas  constituting  what,  in  its  present  phase, 
is  denominated  the  Oxford  divinity,  are  necessarily  connected 
with  the  doctrine  of  prelatic,  apostolical  succession  ;  and  secondly, 
that  these  dogmas  are  characteristically  Romish;  —  our  infer- 
ence is  unavoidable,  namely,  that  the  tendency  of  this  doctrine 
of  prelatic,  apostolical  succession,  is  necessarily  and  certainly  to- 
wards popery  ;  that  it  is,  therefore,  to  be  eschewed  as  evil  by 
all  who  love  protestantism  as  the  true  faith  of  the  gospel,  and 
who  reject  popery  as  being  contrary  to  God's  word. 

It  may,  however,  be  objected  to  this  conclusion,  that  it  is 
based  merely  upon  opinion  and  theory,  and  not  upon  facts. 
Now,  although  any  such  objection  would  be  most  unreasonable, 
yet  still  it  may  be  met  by  evidence  from  recent  and  notorious 
facts.  Our  first  case  will  be  the  conversion  of  the  Hon.  G. 
Spencer,  of  England,  who  has  recently  gone  over  to  the  church 
of  Rome,  and  is  now  one  of  its  most  enthusiastic  devotees.  He 
justly  argued,  that  there  was  "no  halfway  house,"  and  that  con- 
sistency demanded  that  believing,  as  he  did,  the  doctrines  incul- 
cated by  these  Anglican  divines,  and  especially  as  it  regarded 
scripture  and  tradition,  he  should  unite  himself  with  the  church 
of  Rome.' 

1)  See  Lond.  Christ.  Obs.  1837,  •'  The    most  conspicuous  convert  to 

p.  146.  Romanism  of  late  years  in  England, 

In    the  London  Christian  Observ-  is  the  Hon.  G.  Spencer;  and  he  was 

er,    for  November,    1839,  it  is  said,  led  to  it  directly  in  the  path  Dr.  Hook 


2S0  PKELATIC    DIVINITY    THE    HIGH    ROAD    TO    POPERY.     [lECT.  XI. 

Another  case,  which  has  excited  much  interest,  is  that  of  a. 
young  gentleman  of  the  name  of  Biden,  eldest  son  of  an  East- 
India  captain,  who  now  holds  a  high  official  appointment  at 
Madras.  A  full  account  of  the  circumstances  of  his  conversion 
will  be  found  in  the  London  Christian  Observer  for  January, 
1841,  drawn  up  by  an  approver  of  the  Oxford  Tracts,  and  the 
intimate  companion  of  Mr.  Biden.'  He  says,  "  his  conver- 
sion and  apostacy  are  ascribed  to  the  writings  of  Dr.  Pusey  ;" 
and  the  truth  of  this  statement  I  can  most  positively  affirm. 
"  The  staple  of  his  conversation  was  derived  from  the  Oxford 
tracts."  "  He  told  me  he  had  abstained  for  days  together 
from  meat,  in  order,  with  his  savings,  to  purchase  Dr.  Pusey's 
own,  and  other  theological  works  of  his  (Dr.  Pusey's)  recom- 
mendation, more  especially  some  of  the  early  fathers  ;  and  to 
such  had  his  exclusive  attention  been  directed."  "  He 
attached,"  this  writer  further  adds,  "  as  much  importance  to 
the  shape  and  fashion  of  his  clerical  habit  as  the  phariseesof  old 
to  their  phylacteries  and  hems  ;  and  spoke  repeatedly  of  his 
intention  to  restore  (as  much  as  in  him  lay)  the  ancient  disci- 
pline of  the  church  in  his  choice  of  the  alb,  the  cope,  and  other 
canonical  vestments.     This  is  one  instance  among  many  such." 

A  writer  in  the  London  Christian  Observer  for  August,  1840, 
gives  from  his  own  knowledge,  another  example  illustrative  of 
this  tendency.^  "  The  father  of  the  most  influential  Roman 
catholic  gentleman  in  my  neighborhood,  was  a  clergyman  of 
the  Church  of  England,  and  a  prebendary  of  one  of  our  cathe- 
drals. On  one  occasion"he  preached  a  sermon  at  Oxford,  on 
the  subject  of  the  authority  of  the  ministry,  for  which  he  re- 
ceived the  thanks  of  most  of  the  heads  of  Houses  ;  with,  how- 
ever, the  remark,  made  by  one  who  dissented  —  that  he  disap- 
proved of  such  doctrines  as  nearly  resembling  Romanism,  and 
that  the  preacher  was  almost  a  papist.  The  accuracy  of  this 
judgment  was  afterwards  made  manifest,  by  the  perversion  of 
the  preacher  to  the  church  of  Rome,  in  whose  tenets  he  edu- 
cated his  children.     I  received   this   information   from   a  near 

asserts  was  never  trodden  in  the  way  will  corroborate  our  statement   by  a 
thither.     He  is  known  repeatedly  to  passage   from   the  Rev.  Dr.  Nolan's 
have  declared,   that   from   what   Dr.  Treatise,     just     published,    entitled, 
Hook  called  high-church  divines,  he  "  The  Catholic  Character  of  Christian- 
learned  so  much  that  he  found  that  he  ity,  as   recognized  by  the    Reformed 
needed  to  learn  no  more ;  and  most  Church,  in  opposition  to  the  corrupt 
especially  in  regard  to  the  questions  traditions  of  the  Church  of  Rome." 
of  tradition  and  the  sacraments ;  and  1)  See  p.  6-59  ;  also,  pp.  660,  662. 
thus    he   was   led   from   these  high-  2)  See  p.  659,  also  p.  660,  662 
church  views  in  the  Anglican  pale  to  3)  See  p.  22. 
what  he   now   considers   to   be  true  4)  See  p.  475. 
church  views  in  that  of  Rome.     We 


LECT.  XTI.]  PRELATIC    DIVINITY    LEADS    TO    POPERY.  281 

relation  of  the  party,  also  a  minister  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land." 

In  the  same  work  for  January  1841/  it  is  reported  as  "an 
indubitahle  fact,  that  several  young  ladies  and  some  young  gen- 
tlemen have  lately  found  their  way  to  the  mystical  Babylon  via 
Oxford," 

That  these  are  but  examples  of  conversions  which  are  rapidly 
increasing  through  the  same  causes,  is  insisted  upon  in  the  same 
work.  "  We  have  several  times,"  say  they ,2  "  noticed  the  havoc 
which  Dr.  Wiseman  and  other  Roman  catholic  controversial- 
ists are  making  among  unstable  protestants,  by  the  aid  of  the  su- 
icidal admissions  of  the  Oxford  tracts." 

"Divines  of  this  class,"  says  Dr.  Wiseman,  "  whether  living 
or  dead,  have  been  more  than  once  subservient  to  the  spread  of 
catholicity.  The  late  Mr.  Vaughan  of  Leicester,  was  ever  most 
assiduous  in  preaching  to  his  protestant  flock,  on  the  high-church 
doctrine  of  authority  in  matters  of  faith,  on  the  sin  of  dissent, 
and  the  unsafety  of  those  who  submitted  and  adhered  not  to  the 
church  ;  and  the  consequence  was,  that  several  of  his  congrega- 
tion, convinced  by  his  arguments,  but  following  them  up  to  their 
real  conclusions,  passed  over  to  the  catholic  faith,  and  became 
zealous  members  of  our  holy  religion.  We  had  the  pleasure  of 
being  acquainted  with  one  who  for  years  had  exercised  the  min- 
istry in  the  established  religion,  but  became  a  convert  to  the 
truth,  and,  in  his  old  age,  took  orders  in  the  church.  We  asked 
him  on  one  occasion,"  says  Wiseman,  "  by  what  course  he  had 
been  brought  to  embrace  our  religion,  with  so  many  sacrifices  ? 
He  informed  us  that  he  had  always  been  a  zealous  high-church- 
man, and  had  studied  and  held  the  opinions  of  the  old  (no,  not 
the  old,  but  the  innovating  Laudite)  English  divines.  He  had 
thus  firmly  upheld  the  authority  of  the  church ;  he  had  believed 
in  the  real  presence  of  Christ's  body  and  blood  in  the  blessed 
eucharist ;  he  had  regretted  the  destruction  of  ceremony  and  re- 
ligious symbols  in  worship,  and  had  fully  satisfied  himself  on  the 
authority  of  his  leaders,  that  many  catholic  practices  usually 
much  decried,  were  blameless,  and  might  be  even  salutary.  His 
religious  principles  being  thus  formed  upon  the  doctrines  of  that 
school,  he  could  not  avoid  noticing  that,  practically,  they  were 
not  held  by  the  church  in  which  he  had  learned  them  ;  he  looked 
around  him  for  some  place  where  they  might  be  found,  and  to 
his  astonishment  discovered,  that  among  catholics  his  theory  of 
Christianity  alone  existed  in  a   perfect  and  harmonious  scheme. 

1)  See  p.  21.  2)  Lond.  Chr.  Obs.  for  1838,  pp. 

821,  823. 

36 


!g82 


PKELATIC    DIVINITY    LEADS   TO   POPERY.         [LECT.  XII. 


He  had  little  or  nothing  to  change;  he  merely  transferred  his 
allegiance  from  a  party  to  a  church,  and  became  a  catholic,  that 
he  ini<^ht  remain  a  consistent  protestant!  '" 

As  illustrative  of  the  popish  tendency  of  that  system  of  which 
the  prelatic  doctrine  of  apostolic  succession  is  the  radiating  cen- 
tre of  emanating  light,  we  have  thus  given  the  conversion  of 
many  individuals  through  its  direct  instrumentality  to  the  Rom- 
ish church.  To  these  we  are  sorry  in  being  able  to  allude  to  the 
case  of  an  individual,  who  is  every  way  capable  of  rightly  judg- 
ing upon  the  merits  of  the  case  ;  who  has  given  unusual  attention 
to  the  whole  bearings  of  this  extensive  controversy  ;  and  whose 
present  convictions,  in  favor  of  the  Roman  catholic  church,  were 
materially  influenced  by  the  study  of  these  Anglican  divines. 
This  most  estimable  individual  has  himself  informed  me,  and 
allowed  me  to  say,  that,  in  coming  to  his  present  conclusions,  he 


1)  "Facts  Speak. — From  some 
late  London  papers  we  take  the  fol- 
lowing facts,"  says  the  Episcopal  Re- 
corder, of  Pliiladclpliia,  (for  February, 
1841,)  "  showing  what  is  the  practical 
influence  of  the  doctrines  of  the  new 
Oxford  sect  upon  those  to  whom  they 
are  taught.  We  deem  it  a  solemn 
duty  to  keep  our  readers  informed  of 
these  facts  : 

"  '  The  opinions  they  advocate  are  so 
pregnant  with  danger  to  the  best  in- 
terests of  the  protestant  cliurch,  of 
that  church  for  which  our  fathers  suf- 
fered peril,  persecution,  and  even 
death  itself,  I  cannot  forbear  pointing 
out  a  case  v^'hich  has  recently  come  to 
my  knowledge,  ('and  I  fear  it  is  not  a 
solitary  one,)  in  which  the  members 
of  tiie  Romish  church  boldly  and  tri- 
umphantly point  to  the  writings  of 
Keble,  Newman,  &c.  in  support  of 
their  own  idolatrous  worship.  The 
circumstance  to  which  I  refer  is  this. 
A  lady  has  recently  become  a  convert 
to  the  Romish  faitli,  and  a  protestant 
friend  in  the  neighborhood,  out  of  an 
earnest  desire  for  the  welfare  of  her 
soul,  wrote  to  her  a  most  affectionate 
letter  on  the  subject,  pointing  out 
Bomo  of  the  absurdities  and  incon- 
sistencies of  the  church  into  which 
she  had  entered.  The  lady  wrote  in 
reply  a  very  long  epistle,  evidently 
dictated  by  her  priest,  in  wiiich  she 
refers  to  the  writings  of  Keble,  New- 
man, &c.,  to  show  that  though  there 
was  a  slight  difference  between  the 
two  churches  on  the  subject  of  tran- 
substantiation,  yet  that  they  (Keble 
and  Newman)  held   the    doctrine  of 


the  real  presence;  maintained  the  au- 
thority of  tradition;  objected  to  the 
Bible  being  the  only  ground-work  of 
the  protestant  faith,  and  in  fact  differ- 
ed in  no  material  point  from  the 
church  of  Rome.  The  writer  main- 
tains that  we  are  to  be  content  to  call 
the  statements  of  these  writers  errors, 
or  anti-scriptural  vagaries,  for  these 
eminent  divines  hold  them  to  be  the 
doctrines  of  the  protestant  church, 
and  consider  those  in  the  light  of  dis- 
senters who  differ  from  them.  Now, 
sir,  admitting  that  the  Oxford  Tract 
writers  do  not  so  fully  and  entirely 
agree  with  the  church  of  Rome,  as 
her  priests  and  people  assert  them  to 
do,  yet  it  must  be  evident  to  every 
candid  mind,  that  the  tendency  of  their 
doctrines  is  most  injurious  to  the  best 
interests  of  religion  :  and  when  a  con- 
vert to  the  church  of  Rome  quotes  their 
writings  in  justification  of  what  she 
has  done,  I  think  it  can  no  longer  be 
doubted  but  that  they  are  to  be  num- 
bered among  the  most  dangerous  ene- 
mies the  Church  of  England  ever  had 
to  contend  against.  What,  then,  are 
we  to  do .''  if  these  are  right,  why 
have  we  separated  ourselves  from  the 
church  of  Rome  .''  But  if  their  works 
be  evil,  if  they  be  blind  leaders  of  the 
blind,  if  they  be  secretly  undermining 
the  foundations  of  our  cimrch,  or  if 
they  be  actively  engaged  in  bringing 
converts  within  the  pale  of  the  popish 
communion,  how  is  it  that  our  bishops 
do  not  prevent  men  from  eating  the 
bread  of  the  church,  while  they  are 
doing  all  that  in  them  lies  for  its  de- 
struction.'' ' " 


LECT.  XII.]  PREI.ATIC   DIVINITY   LEADS    TO   POPERY.  283 

was  influenced  to  a  very  considerable  extent,  by  the  concessions 
embodied  in  the  teaching  of  the  standard  Anghcan  divines  — 
and  that  he  considered  it  to  be  impossible  for  any  man  consist- 
ently to  believe  all  that  they  taught,  and  in  connexion  with  this 
very  system,  and  yet  remain  out  of  the  Roman  catholic  commu- 
nion.! 

If,  then,  the  tendencies  of  the  unrenewed  heart  are  towards 
popery  —  and  if  protestantism  depends  for  its  continued  preser- 
vation and  prosperity,  upon  the  sleepless  jealousy  of  its  defend- 
ers—  we  may  well  be  excused  from  the  charge  of  officious  zeal, 
if  in  repelling  this  excommunicating  system,  we  lift  our  loud 
and  unequivocal  protest  against  its  Romish  tendencies. 

Nor  has  the  influence  of  these  views  been  confined  to  such 
recent  conversions.  It  is  known  that  Chillingworth  once  turned 
papist,  and  was  for  some  time  enslaved  to  that  wily  system. 
Why  he  did  so,  we  learn  from  a  labored  article  in  his  defence, 
in  the  London  Christian  Observer:- — "But  we  have  further  to 
reply  to  Mr.  Keble,  that  if  Chillingworth  became  a  Socinian, 
(which  we  deny,)  it  was  far  more  likely  that  he  should  run  into 
that  or  any  other  heresy,  as  he  did  for  a  time  into  popery,  from 
the  unsatisfactory  and  unscriptural  principles  in  wliich  he  was 
educated  —  for  Archbishop  Laud  was  his  godfather  and  adviser  — 
than  from  having  made  the  unerring  word  of  God  his  guide. 
The  Oxford  Tract  divines  are  very  short-sighted  in  so  pertina- 
ciously urging  the  history  of  Chillingworth  as  a  proof  of  the 
danger  of  making  the  Bible  the  only  rule  of  faith  ;  for  it  was 
because  he  did  not  do  so  from  the  first  that  he  vacillated;  and 
when  he  at  length  arrived  at  that  conclusion,  he  became  settled 

1)  In  a.  review  published  in  the  nectcd  with  the  question  of  its  credi- 

Catholic    Miscellany    of    Charleston,  bility."     (He  refers  to  Palmer  on  the 

(for  March  6,  1^41,)  of  Bishop  Onder-  Ch.  vol.  ii.  pp.  48,49,  and  ref  Note  z, 

donk's  Charge  on  the  Rule  of  Faith,  vol.  i.  p.  4'M.)      Indeed,  throughout 

and  wJiich   we   conclude  was  written  this  article,  the  writer  parries  every 

by  the  individual  alluded  to,  the  testi-  thrust  from  the  two-edged  sword  of 

mony  of  these  Anglican  divines  to  tlie  the  reviewed  prelate,  by  holding  forth 

Romish  doctrines  of  infallibility,  &c.,  the  shield  of  some  one  or  other  of  his 

is  openly  claimed  and  asserted.    "  The  own    favorite   doctors   of  the  Oxford 

majority  to  which  we  refer  in  favor  of  schoolmen.     In  proving  "the  infalli- 

infallibility,"  says  the  reviewer,  "  is  bility  of  traditions,"  (§  xxiii.)  he  says, 

increased  by  the  concurring  opinions  "  the  minor  is  proved  by  tlie  notorious 

of  a  large  portion  of  the  clergy  of  the  acknowledgment  of  protestant  episco- 

Church    of    England,    of   which    the  palians,  one  of  whom  maintains  that 

episcopal  church  of  the  United  States  '  it  is  NEciiss.\Ry  for  the  right  under- 

is  a  branch."     Again  :   "  A   very   nu-  standing   of  our    duty  as   christians, 

merous,  learned  and  influential   body  that    we   join  together    scripture 

of  the  clergy  of  the  Church  of  £ng-  asv  tradition."     (Dr.  Brett.  Trad, 

land  contend  that  it  (i.  e.  tradition,)  Necessary,  p.  101.  §  xxv.) 
"cannot  be  otherwise  than  dirinehj,  2)  April,  1839,  p.  224  ;  see  also  p. 

infallibly  true,"  and  "  that  the  whole  229. 
fabric  of  Christianity   is   vitally   con- 


284  PRELATIC    DIVINITY    EVER    LED    TO    POPERY.       [lECT,  XII. 

on  the  rock  of  ages.  He  afliims,  in  his  account  of  *  what  moved 
him  to  turn  papist,'  that  it  was  chiefly  that  there  must  be  a  per- 
petual, unerring  church  ;  that  '  the  church  (not  the  Bible)  is  our 
guide  in  the  way  to  heaven ;'  that  '  there  must  to  the  end  be  a 
succession  of  pastors,  by  adhering  to  whom  men  might  he  kept 
from  wavering  in  matters  of  faith,  and  from  being  carried  up 
and  down  by  every  wind  of  false  doctrine.'  He  fancied,  also, 
as  Laud  taught  him,  and  as  Mr.  Keble  maintains,  that  the  scrip- 
tures are  not  our  only  guide,  (under  the  teaching  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,)  but  that  there  is  an  apostolical,  unwritten  *  depositum,' 
handed  down  by  tradition,  and  embodied  in  the  visible  church ; 
and  hence  he  was  easily  persuaded  by  the  Jesuit  Fisher,  who 
resided,  with  several  other  Romanist  priests,  about  Oxford,  that 
the  church  of  Rome  supplied  exactly  what  his  previous  opinions 
had  led  him  to  consider  necessary,  but  which  he  could  not  find 
in  the  protestant  church.  Archbishop  Laud,  the  doctrines  of 
whose  school  had  thus  prepared  him  for  embracing  popery, 
labored  to  remove  his  scruples,  and  induced  him  to  return  from 
the  Jesuit  college  at  St.  Omers,  and  to  reunite  himself  with  the 
Church  of  England." 

The  author  goes  on  to  say,  "  certain  it  is,  that  Laud  was  sadly 
harassed  by  his  friends  and  pupils  abiding  to  popery  by  a  sort  of 
elective  attraction. ^  They  seemed  to  be  ever  sailing  on  a  course 
so  near  the  Latin  gulf-stream,  that  they  were  inconstant  danger 
of  being  carried  away  by  it ;  and  though  they  did  not  write 
'  tendimus  in  Latium '  on  their  colors,  the  majority  of  be- 
holders considered  them  eventually  bound  to  the  Italian  port. 
The  Hon.  Mr.  Spencer,  who  may  probably  have  a  cardinal's 
hat  in  due  time,  arrived  at  his  destination  by  precisely  the  same 
mode  of  steering ;  indeed,  he  was  not  so  far  advanced  as  are 
some  of  the  Oxford  Tract  teachers  and  scholars,  upon  the  subject 
of  authoritative  tradition,  and  so  forth  —  those  rocks  upon  which 
so  many  have  made  shipwreck  of  faith  —  when  a  sudden  gust 
induced  him  to  complete  the  voyage." 

It  is  well  known,  also,  that  James  II.  referred  to  the  preface 
to  Hooker's  Ecclesiastical  Polity,  and  to  Heylin's  History  of  the 
Reformation,  as  the  works  which  mainly  contributed  to  his  renun- 
ciation of  protestantism.^ 

1)  p.  225.  no  other  church  hath  any  salvation  in 

2)  Goodman,  bishop  of  Glouces-  it,  but  only  so  far  as  it  concurs  with 
ter,  in  the  time  of  Laud,  advocated  the  faith  of  tlie  church  of  Rome." 
auricular  confession,  and  in  his  will  And  yet  the  British  Critic  says  lie  was 
declared,  ''1  do  acknowledge  the  "  a  consistent  protestant."  (Mcllvaine 
church  of  Rome   to    be    the    mother  on  Oxf.  Div.  p.  277.) 

church.     And  I  do  verily  believe  that  3)  Hallam's  Const.  Hist.  ii.  514. 


LECT.  XII.]     PRELATIC  DIVINITY  HERE  ALSO  LEADS  TO  POPERY.  285 

Nor  is  the  danger  arising  to  the  protestant  cause,  from  this 
high-church  system,  confined  to  England. 

That  there  are  those,  in  the  episcopal  churches  in  this  coun- 
try, who  harmonize  with  these  sentiments,  and  who,  therefore, 
sympathize  very  tenderly  with  the  Romish  church,  is  beyond 
controversy.  "It  may  be,"  says  the  Rev.  John  A.  Clark,  in  his 
recent  Letters  on  the  Church, i  "  that  there  are  some  within 
our  borders,  that  feel,  and  manifest  a  strong  affinity,  to  the 
church  of  Rome.  If  there  are  such,  they  are  not  true  sons 
of  our  church.  They  are  enemies  in  disguise.  While  with 
bluster  and  noise,  they  would  fain  make  men  think  they  were 
the  only  true  churchmen,  that  '  they  are  the  people,  and  that 
ivisdom  will  die  with  them,'  they  are,  in  fact,  traitors  in  our 
camp.  We  are  not  called  upon  to  defend  them,  or  what  they 
teach.  It  is  the  church,  and  her  pure  doctrines,  we  are  to  ad- 
vocate. The  persons  just  referred  to,  are  mere  excrescenses 
upon  our  ecclesiastical  body." 

That  such  principles  are  diffused  to  a  great  extent,  even  in 
this  country,  and  are  received  with  favor,  by  many  in  the  prot- 
estant episcopal  church,  is  a  truth  which  cannot  be  questioned, 
and  should  not  be  concealed.  It  is  made  manifest  by  the  fact 
that  several  of  these  Oxford  tracts,  and  other  similar  produc- 
tions, have  been  issued  from  the  press  of  the  Episcopal  Tract 
Society,  in  New  York.^ 

In  one  of  these  publications,'^  which  is  said  to  have  been  in- 
strumental in  converting  a  presbyterian  minister,  from  the  error 
of  his  ways,  the  identity  of  the  Romish  and  the  Anglican 
churches,  is  openly  proclaimed,  and  most  tenderly  and  affection- 
ately represented.  In  illustrating  the  difficulties  experienced 
by  the  prelacy,  in  preserving  the  ancient  theory  of  the  catholic 
church,  it  is  said  "If  no  western  church  now-a-days  is  quite 
what  its  mother  (i.  e.  '  the  church  of  Rome,'  see  context)  used 
to  be,  the  catholic  church  in  England,  Scotland,  and  America, 
(that  is,  the  protestant  episcopal  churches  of  those  countries,"*) 
surely  comes  nearest  to  her  ;  nay,  so  near,  that  they  who  have 
well  scanned  the  mother's  lineaments,  can  be  at  no  loss  to  trace 
her  features  in  the  child  "  !  !  ! 

That  society  has  also  republished  and  adopted  as  its  own, 
the  work  of  Mr,  Perceval,  on  the  apostolical  succession.     Now 

1)  Phila,  1839,  p.  34.  4)  This,  we  presume,  is  the  ex- 

2)  See  those  bound  up  in  a  vol-  planation  of  the  American  editors, 
ume  entitled,  "  Church  Principles,"  who  were  justly  afraid  that  even 
and  almost  all  the  recent  issues  of  that  episcopalians  in  this  country  would 
society.  not  readily  understand  this  new  Rom- 

3)  Tract  No.  153,  "  The  Ancient  ish  nomenclature. 
Things  of  the  Catholic  Church." 


286  PRELATIC    DIVINITY    HERE    LEADS    TO    FOPERY.    [lECT.  XII, 

in  speaking  of  this  writer,  the  London  Christian  Observer  says/ 
"  Mr.  Cuinming  has  good  cause  to  ask  the  Honorable  Mr.  Per- 
ceval why  he  does  not  go  over  to  Rome,  as  the  Honorable  Mr. 
Spencer  did,  instead  of  wearing  the  robes,  and  eating  the  bread, 
of  a  protestant  church  ?  There  is  nothing  essential  to  liinder 
his  reconciling  himself  to  the  Harlot  of  Babylon  ;  for  he  ex- 
pressly says,  '  I  am  inclined  to  believe  that  there  is  nothing  in 

the  TKIDENTINK  STATEMENTS  WHICH  CANNOT  BE  FAIRLY  REC- 
ONCILED v)ith  the  GOSPEL  doctrine.'  'It  seems  to  me,  I  con- 
fess, that  it  is  as  much  in  the  power  of  every  clergyman  of  the 
church  of  Rome,  to  preach  the  true  and  saving  doctrine  of 
jusiification,  according  to  the  New  Testament,  without  violat- 
ing the  decrees  of  the  council  of  Trent,  as  it  is  for  the  clergy 
of  England,  to  do,  ivithout  violating  the  articles  of  their 
church.'  There  is  another  example  of  the  Jesuistry,  which 
we  have  so  often  complained  of,  in  the  members  of  this  new 
sect." 

A  writer  in  the  Ef)iscopal  Recorder,^  under  the  signature  of 
"  Epsilon,"  in  presenting  some  "  facts  for  the  church,"  uses  the 
following  language  : — "  Before  giving  the  '  extracts  '  to  which  I 
refer,  (i.  e.  from  these  high-church  divines  of  the  Oxford  school,) 
I  will  enumerate  their  '  titles,'  which  are  my  own,  but  which 
I  submit  to  the  judgment  of  my  brethren,  are  fully  justified  by 
the  text. 

"  1.  The  scriptures  are  not  given  for  an  initiation  into  the  faith, 
but  only  as  a  safeguard  against  error.  2.  It  is  almost  certain 
liiat  the  traditionary  teachings  of  the  church  catholic,  can 
never  conflict  with  scripture.  3.  We  should  have  a  religious 
dread  of  interpreting  the  scriptures  contrary  to  the  fathers  and 
ancient  doctors  of  the  church.  4.  Young  people  should  first 
look  for  their  faith  to  the  church,  and  not  to  the  scriptures,  to 
form  a  creed  for  themselves.  5.  It  is  a  matter  of  choice  rather 
than  of  obligation,  whether  they  shall  compare  these  teach- 
ings of  the  church  with  the  scriptures.  6.  The  church  is  an 
unerring  guide  in  teaching  them  that  there  is  a  new  birth  in 
baptism.  7.  They  should  not  wait  for  any  call  or  conversion, 
before  they  enter  into  full  communion  with  the  church,  but  they 
must  serve  God  as  they  have  been  instructed  by  the  church,  take 
the  prayer-book  for  their  guide,  and,  if  possible,  (?)  read  such 
portions  of  the  scriptures,  as  the  church  has  appointed  in  the 
lessons,  daily.  8.  Belief  of  the  divine  origin  of  the  creeds  in 
the  prayer-book,  stands  on  the  same  ground  with  the  canon  of 
scripture.     9.   Without  the  creed,  we  should  not  be  able  to  un- 

])  For  ]S:]7,  p.  840.  2)  In  No.  r.2,  p.  205,  1841. 


LECT.   XII.]    PRELATIC    DIVINITY    HERE    LEADS    TO    POPERY.  287 

derstand  the  scriptures  aright,  and  to  know  what  is  most  impor- 
tant in  them  to  our  salvation.  10.  The  scriptures  are  not  a  safe 
guide  without  the  teachings  of  the  church. 

"Beloved  brethren  of  the  church,  what  think  you  of  some  of 
these  propositions  ?  Can  you  beheve  that  they  are  openly 
propagated  by  a  periodical  of  the  church,  to  each  number  of 
which  is  attached  the  official  sanction  of  the  bishop  of  the  di- 
ocese, by  way  of  a  standing  advertisement ! ! !  and  he,  too,  a  pro- 
fessor in  the  General  Theological  Seminary,  an  institution  to 
which  the  whole  church  in  these  United  States  sends  its  candi- 
dates for  orders,  to  be  instructed  in  the  doctrines  and  principles 
of  the  church  ?  Is  there  nothing  alarming  here  ?  Nothing  that 
calls  for  humiliation,  and  prayer,  and  effort  ?  —  yea,  immediate, 
zealous,  united,  efficient  effort?  " 

In  exposing,  therefore,  the  tendencies  of  this  prelatic  system 
toward  popery'  —  in  pointing  out  their  mutual  affinity,  and  the 
probable  descent  from  the  one  to  the  other,  of  those  who  suffer 
themselves  to  be  led  forward  by  the  inward  bias  of  received 
opinions  —  we  cannot  surely  be  regarded  otherwise  than  as  per- 
forming an  act  of  friendship  toward  American  episcopacy,  as  it 
is  based  upon  the  constitution  of  the  protestant  episcopal 
church,  in  these  United  States.  That  while  these  "  traitors  in 
the  camp  "2  (as  they  are  justly  called)  may  be  successfully  re- 

1)  The  elemental  principles  of  views,  is  in  the  bosom  of  the  Romish 
the  church  of  Rome  could  not  be  more  church,"  he  adds,  "we  fear,  how- 
strongly  stated  than  they  are  by  the  ever,  there  are  those  among  us  who 
Rev.  Andrew  Fowler,  in  his  Gate-  have  no  love  for  the  articles  and  homi- 
chism,  published  in  Charleston,  in  lies  of  the  church, — no  affinity  with 
1840.  He  teaches  that  tlie  church  is"  a  protestantism.  They  would  fain  ])er- 
judge  of  controversies  between  chris-  suade  all  men  that  they  are  the  only 
tians  in  matters  of  private  wrong,  churchmen  among  us.  They  are 
of  RELIGIOUS  DISCIPLINE,  AND  OF  Very  boisterous  in  this  claim.  Their 
FAITH."  (p.  7.  See  also  p.  15,  and  cry  continually  is,  '  The  Temple  of  the 
again  p.  27.  Again  on  p.  29  :)  "  No  Lord, — the  Temple  of  the  Lord, — the 
man  is  at  liberty  to  act  contrary  to  the  Temple  of  the  Lord,  are  we  ! ' 

will  of  God,  AND  THE  CANONS  OF  THE  "  This  class  of  persons  havc  been  al- 

CHURCH  OF  WHICH  HE  IS  A  MEMBER."  ways  Very  forward  'to  tithe  mint,  and 

Again,  on  p.  31,  he   includes   among  annis  and  cummin,'  while   they  have 

"  the  ordinances  of  divine  worship,"  '  neglected  the   weightier  matters  of 

"  other  festivals  in  honor  of  the  birth,  the  law,'  and  have  seemed  to  regard 

death,  resurrection   and  ascension  of  it  a  far  greater  sin  to  deviate  from  a 

our  Saviour,  and   in   memory  of  the  rubric,  than  to  break  one  of  the  most 

APOSTLES  AND  MARTYRS."  sacred   Commands  of  the  decalogue. 

2)  One  of  the  editors  of  the  Their  sympathies  all  lead  them  to  the 
Episcopal  Recorder,  after  speaking  of  bosom  of  her  who  sitteth  upon  the 
the  good  effects  resulting  from  oppo-  seven  hills.  When  they  come  to  carry 
sition  to  the  O.xford  Tracts,  and  giving  out  to  their  legitimate  results,  their 
it  as  his  opinion  that  "  a  portion  with-  ideas  in  reference  to  tradition,  and  the 
in  our  pale  "  would  probably  be  driven  sacraments  and  the  intermediate  state, 
in  defending  their  system,  to  carry  it  they  will  find  that  any  ground  short 
out  into  its  legitimate  consequences,  of  Roman i.sni,  is  too  nllra-protcslant, 
and  to  see  that  the  only  place  where  is  nut  sufficiently  culholic  for  them." 
they  can  find  true  sympathy  with  their 


288  THIS    PRELATIC    THEORY    MUST    LEAD    TO    POPERY.    [lECT.  XII. 

sisted,  the  spirit  of  liberty,  of  liberality,  and  of  piety,  may  be 
aroused  in  the  true-hearted  sons  of  that  most  worthy  branch  of 
the  catholic  and  apostolic  church.' 

We  have  now  made  good  our  proposition,  that  tiiis  prclatic  the- 
ory is  essentially  popish.  It  is  so,  when  we  examine  the  ele- 
mental principles  common  to  both  systems.  It  is  so,  because 
it  involves,  as  necessary  consequences,  the  whole  system  now 
understood  as  "  Oxford  divinity,"  or  "  Puseyism,"  but  which 
has  ever  been  found  in  association  with  high-church  principles; 
and  because  this  system  is  undeniably  Romish. 

This  conclusion  has  been  irrefragably  established  by  the  tes- 
timony of  friends  and  of  foes  —  of  those  within  and  without  the 
church  —  of  episcopalians  and  Romanists.  But  as  this  is  a 
point  of  great  practical  moment,  and  one  upon  which  much  feel- 
ing has  been  excited  and  great  ignorance  prevails,  we  will  add 
some  further  remarks.' 

Admit  this  doctrine,  that  the  whole  authority  and  promised 
efficacy  of  the  church  is  given  by  delegation,  to  this  prelatical 
succession,  in  perpetuity,  and  can  only  be  received  through  and 
by  means  of  it —  and  how  could  we  justify  ourselves  in  remain- 
ing separate  from  the  Romish  church  ?  She  confessedly,  as 
these  divines  teach,  possesses  that  true,  original,  and  heaven- 
ordained  succession,  upon  whose  validity  depend  entirely,  the 
hopes  and  character  of  the  English  prelacy  and  the  American 
episcopacy.  This  succession,  the  Roman  church  declares  she 
never  gave  to  the  English,  in  her  independent  character,  and  its 
transference,  as  she  teaches,  could  only  be  made  by  her  express 
intention  to  convey  it.  Even  when  surreptitiously  possessed,  it 
was,  as  this  Romish  church  teaches,  again  forfeited  and  lost 
after  the  reign  of  Mary,  and  is  now  entirely  wanting  in  the 
English  and  American  prelacy.  But  that  it  still  remains  in 
all  its  plenitude  in  this  mother  of  churches,  these  writers,  on  the 
contrary,  freely  allow  ;  although  they  would  substantiate  a  charge 
of  schism  against  the  Romish  churches  within  their  dioceses. 
And  how,  therefore,  is  it  possible  for  any  one,  who  thoroughly 
believes  these  high-church  principles,  to  hesitate  about  connecting 
himself  with  a  church  which,  as  he  is  thus  taught,  possesses  the 

1)  See  Note  A.  a  prey  worthy  of  his  capacious  bite, 

2)  Our  discussion  has  been  in  upon  a  single  sentence  in  a  short  dis- 
some  measure  anticipated  by  the  very  course,  and  incidentally  brought  in  by 
able  reply  of  the  Rev.  H.  A.  Board-  a  prestjyterian  clergyman.  In  this 
man,of  Philadelphia,  to  Bishop  Doane,  case,  however,  the  "  biter  was  bitten." 
of  New  Jersey,  who  had  very  C07iven-  Our  discussion,  which  had  been  de- 
ientlv  passed  by  an  octavo  volume  on  livered  before  Mr.  Boardman's  publi- 
the  same  subject,  by  an  associated  cation,  is  still  needed,  as  the  above 
member  of  the  prelacy,  and  seized,  as  fact  will  show. 


LECT.  XII.]  PRELACY    AND    POPERY    IDENTIFIED-  289 

true  succession,  and  which  succession,  with  all  the  assurance  of  in- 
fallibility, she  declares  is  not  enjoyed  by  the  English  or  Ameri- 
can prelacy  ? 

True,  the  Romish  church  teaches  many  things  hard  to  be  be- 
lieved, which  can  only  be  received  by  an  implicit  faith,  and  which 
many  wrest  to  their  destruction  ;  but  so  also  do  the  abettors  of  this 
doctrine.'  True,  the  Romish  church  claims  divine  authority  for 
traditions  oral  as  well  as  written ;  but  so  also  do  these  divines.* 
True,  the  Romish  church  claims  authority  to  interpret  the 
scriptures,  and  to  give  their  meaning  to  the  people  ;  and  so  also  do 
these  divines. 3  The  Romish  church  attributes  a  necessary  efficacy 
to  the  sacraments,  by  which,  of  themselves,  they  are  available 
to  salvation  ;  and  so  also  do  these  church  principles."  Does  the 
church  of  Rome  make  baptism  regeneration  and  justification  ? 
so  also  does  this  high-church  party.  Does  the  church  of  Rome 
teach  that  in  the  act  of  consecration,  there  is  made  a  real  change 
in  the  bread  and  the  wine,  so  that  Christ  is  really  present  under 
these  signs,  and  that  the  eucharist  is  a  true  and  proper  sacrifice  ? 
so  do  these  divines.^  Does  the  church  of  Rome  teach  that  men 
are  not  justified  by  the  imputed  righteousness  of  Christ,  but  by 
an  inherent  righteousness  wrought  within  them  ?  so  also  do  these 
divines.*  Does  the  Romish  church  claim  for  herself  infallibility  ? 
the  prelacy  claims  indefectibility  ;  so  that  while  the  one  cannot 
err,  the  other  never  has  and  never  can  fall  away.''  Does 
the  church  of  Rome  throw  uncertainty  over  as  many  truths  as 
possible,  in  order  to  increase  the  power  and  influence  of  the 
clergy,  and  subject  the  laity  more  entirely  to  their  ghostly  rule? 
so  does  the  prelacy.*  Does  the  Romish  church,  in  order  to 
enslave  the  mind,  becloud  the  free  and  gracious  mercy  of  God  ? 
so  do  these  divines  leach  that  there  is  no  certainty  of  pardon 
for  sins  committed  after  baptism .9  Does  the  Romish  church  as- 
sert the  existence  of  a  purgatory  ?  so  does  the  prelacy  that 
of  an  intermediate  place,  where  may  be  sent  especially  the  souls 

1)  See    Lect.    iv.  p.  84.  Nov.  1839,  p.  657  ;  Oxf.  Tr.  No.  81,  p. 

2)  Palmer,  vol.  ii.  pp.  15,  20,  48.  47,  vol.  iv.  Eng.  ed.;  Palmer,  vol.  i. 
Oxf.Tr.  vol.  iv.  p.  1,  Tr.  80,  Eng.  ed.      pp.  518,  524,  525,  527,  530. 

See  Keble  on  Prim.  Trad.     Newman  G)  See  Newman's  Lect.  on  Justi- 

on  Rom.  pp.  335,  329.     Lond.  Chr.  fication,  and  all  of  their  writings, and 

Obs.  1840,  pp.  86,  215.  Mcllvaine  on  the  Oxf.  Div. 

3)  Dr.  Pusey's  Letter,  pp.  18,  20.  7)  Brit.  Crit.  1839,  pp.  461,  465; 
Brit.  Crit.  1839,  pp.  4.56, 459, 461 ,  465.  Newman's  Lecture  on  Rom.  192, 193, 

4)  Newman  on  Rom.  pp.  409,410;  233,  234,  259;  Dr.  Pusey's  Letter, 
Palmer,  vol.  i.  pp.  310,  313,  315,  317 ;      Am.  ed.  p.  29. 

Dr.  Pusey's  Letter,  pp.  85,87,  Am.  ed.;  8)  Newman  on  Rom.  pp.  112, 114, 

Oxf.  Tr.  vol.  iv.  p.  21,  Eng  ed.  327 ;  Lond.  Chr.  Obs.  1839,  p.  699. 

5)  See  Tract  No.  81, in  vol.  iv. Eng.  9)    Newman   on  Rom.   pp.    114, 
ed.  Oxf.  Tr.  vol.  i.  p.  26,  Am.  ed.  and  144 ;  Dr.  Pusey's  Letter,  pp.  60,  62. 
55;  Dr.   Hook   in  Lond.    Chr.    Obs. 

37 


290  PRELACY-    AND    POPERY    IDENTIFIED.  [LECT.  XII. 

of  those  who  are  ''  neither  fit  for  heaven  or  hell.'  Does  that 
church  teach  the  propriety  and  duty  of  invoking  saints  ?  so  do 
these  divines. '^ 

Does  the  church  of  Rome  teach  that  it  is  right  and  proper  to 
offer  up  prayers  for  the  dead  ?  — so  do  these  writer?  abundantly 
affirm.^  Does  the  church  of  Rome  deny  the  sufficiency  of  the 
Bible,  as  a  perfect  and  infallible  rule  of  faith  and  practice?  — 
so,  also,  is  it  declared  by  these  divines.''  Does  that  church 
discredit  the  indiscriminate  circulation  of  the  scriptures  among 
the  people  ?  —  so  do  these  very  writers.*  Does  that  church 
uphold  the  divine  and  superior  sanctity  of  virginity,  and  the 
celibacy  of  the  clergy?  — and  so,  also,  do  these  divines.''  Does 
the  Romish  church  inculcate  the  necessity  of  reserve  in  com- 
municating the  doctrines  of  the  Bible?  —  and  so,  also,  do  these 
divines.'^  Does  the  Romish  church  teach  that  the  church  has  — 
and  ought  to  exercise  —  the  power  to  enforce  her  teaching 
and  to  DEMAND  for  this  purpose  the  aid  of  the  civil  magis- 
trate?—  and  so  do  these  divines.*  Does  that  church  claim  a 
plenary  authority  to  absolve  men  from  their  sins?  —  and  so,  also, 
do  these  writers.s 

Does  that  church  teach  us,  that  there  are  more  sacraments  than 
two  ?  —  so,  also,  do  these  writers.'"  Does  it  affirm  the  duty  of 
confession  to  the  priest? — this  also  is  retained,  as  these  divines 
teach,  in  the  Church  of  England."  Does  that  church  conduct 
her  services  in  a  dead  language,  altogether  unknown  to  the  com- 
mon people?  —  and  do  not  these  divines  regret  that  the  liturgical 
services  are  in  English  ?'^  Does  that  church  utterly  repudiate, 
either  the  right  or  duty  of  the  exercise  of  private  judgment?  — 
and  so,  also,  and  in  the  very  strongest  manner,  do  these  divines." 
Does  the  Romish  church  deny  to  the  laity,  any  interference 
in  the  ecclesiastical  government  of  the  church  ? — so  also  do  these 

1)  Newman  on  Rom.  p.  213.  Let.  Am.  ed.  pp.  140,  145 ;  Anct.  Chr. 

2)  Palmer,  vol.  i.  pp.  210,  212,  vol.  i.  pp.  391,  394,  396,  469,  472,  546. 
and  508 ;  Dr.  Pusey's  Letter,  pp.  133,  7)  Oxf.  Tr.  vol.  iv.  Tr.  80,  &c.; 
138.  Lon.Ch.Obs.  1840,  pp.  164,168;  Anc. 

3)  Bishop   Seabury,   in    British      Christ,  vol.  i.  pp.  459,  468,  500,  506. 
Crit.  1839,  pp.  311,  312;  Newman  on  8)  See  the  Lecture  on  the  intol- 
Rom.  p.220 ;  Lon.  Ch.Ob.  1840,  p.  205.      erant  tendency  of  this  system. 

4)  Newman's  Lect.  on  Rom.  pp.  9)  Passim. 

36,  69,  180, 471,  &c. ;  Oxf.  Tr.  vol.  i.  10)  Palmer,  vol.  i.  p.  523 ;  Dr.  Pu- 

pp.  39,  64,  319,358;  Palmer,  vol.  i.  p.  sey's  Letter,  pp.  57,  64,  65;  Palmer, 

220.  vol.  i.  p.  439. 

5)  Lond.  Obs.  Nov.  1839,  p.  660 ;  11)  Palmer,  vol.  i.  p.  518. 

Dr.  Pusey's  Letter,  Oxf  Tr.  vol.  iv.  12)  See  Anct.  Christ,  vol.  i.  p.  472 

Tr.  80,  70,  71,  Eng.  ed.;  Anct.  Chris.  13)  Newman's  Lect.  on  Rom.  p. 

vol.  i.  p.  458,464.  292,    &c.   298,  &c.   328,   339.     See 

6)  Newman  on  Rom  p  .327  ;  Brit.  Froude's  Declarations  in  Presb.  Def. 
Cr.Oct.  1839, pp.  445, 457;  Dr.  Pusey's  p.  201. 


LECT.  XII.]  PRELACY   AND   POPERY    IDENTIFIED. 


291 


divines.'  Does  it  make  the  people  absolutely  dependent  upon 
their  ghostly  rulers,  as  the  agency  to  whom  God  has  committed 
their  souls  ? — this,  also,  is  the  very  doctrine  of  prelacy.^  Does 
the  Romish  church  hate  and  detest  the  reformation,  with  a  per- 
fect hatred?  —  not  less  do  these  divines  pour  upon  it  all  manner 
of  obloquy  and  reproach.'  Does  that  church  regard  the  glorious 
revolution  of  1688,  as  rebellion  and  impiety?  —  their  sentiments 
are  echoed  back  from  the  chairs  of  Oxford.*  In  short,  does  the 
Romish  church  concentrate  her  pestiferous  errors,  and  perpetuate 
them,  by  the  reverence  attached  to  the  daily  use  of  her  breviary  ? 
have  not  these  divines  re-published  it  substantially  for  her  — 
adopted  it  among  the  number  of  their  tracts  —  held  it  up  to 
admiration  and  reverence  —  eagerly  pressed  its  re-adopiion  and 


l)See  the  Lecture  on  Intolerance, 
as  above  referred  to. 

2)  Brit.  Crit.  1839,  p.  310:  "the 
agency  on  earth  to  which  the  care  of 
the  soul  has  been  intrusted." 

3)  Oxf.  Tr.  vol.  i.  241. 

That  these  high-church  vi^riters  are 
dissatisfied  with  the  Prayer  Book,  and 
with  some  of  the  views  and  principles 
of  the  English  reformers,  see  proved 
in  Bishop  Meade's  sermon  at  the  con- 
secration of  Bishop  Elliott,  Appendix, 
chap,  xviii.  p.  133. 

"  I  believe  it  will  appear  that  the 
great  work  of  the  reformation  was 
chiefly  conducted  by  lay  counsels,  in 
opposition  to  the  clergy.  They  were 
active  in  none  of  the  changes  except 
in  the  restoration  of  popery  under 
Queen  Mary,  and  in  the  cruelties  of 
her  reign."  Sir  Michael  Foster  Knt. 
in  his  examination  of  Bishop  Gibson's 
Codex  Juris  Eccl.  Angl.  p.  45. 

Newman  in  Quart.  Rev.  pp.  306 
and  308. 

See  also  Plea  for  Presbytery,  p.  122. 

They  acknowledge  there  is  but  little 
diflference,  and  an  essential  agreement 
with  popery.  Palmer,  vol.  i.  pp.  181, 
185,  and  210,211,  231,  237,  276,  277, 
and  vol  ii.  p.  17,  130, 248  ;  Newman  on 
Rom.  p.  54  ;  Dr.  Hook  in  Powell  on  Ap. 
Succ.  pp.  171, 172,  173,  175  ;  Percival 
in  Bib.  Rep.  1838,  p.  112.  They  advo- 
cate union  with  her ;  Palmer,  p.  vol.  i. 
232  ;  Brit.  Crit.  1839,  pp.  399, 416,  421 . 
They  regret  separation  from  her ; 
Bishop  Smith  in  Bib.  Rep.  1836,  p. 
29.  For  other  popish  practices,  see 
Hook's  Call  to  Union,  Am.  ed.  pp.  110, 
118,  126,  Lond.  Chr.  Obs.  Ap.  1838, 
pp.  233  and  37. 


On  the  identity  of  these  doctrines 
and  those  advanced  by  Archbishop 
Laud,  see  Neal's  Hist,  of  the  Puritans, 
Eng.  ed.  in  five  vols.  vol.  ii.  pp.  147, 
157, 158, 168,  178,  190,  221,  223,254, 
261 ,  397, 417, 419—  vol.  iii.  p.l67,  and 
the  whole  account  of  his  trial,  and 
particularly  at  pp.  170,  173,  182,  187; 
also  shown  by  McCrie  in  Report  of  the 
Edinb.  Celebration,  pp.  31,  32;  the 
London  Christian  Observer  therefore 
denominates  this  party  the  Laudean 
school  or  sect. 

This  doctrine  of  high-churchism 
also  bases  itself  upon  the  popish  tenet, 
the  intention  of  the  administration. 
Thus  is  it  constantly  argued,  that 
presbyters  have  no  right  to  ordain,  be- 
cause "  the  bishops  who  ordained  them 
did  not  intend  to  confer  such  power." 
Wks.  on  Episco.  vol.  ii.  p.  325. 

Dr.  Bowden  says,  "  but  no  bishop 
ever  gave  a  presbyter  authority  to 
ordain.  (Letters,  1st  series  xxi.  vol. 
ii.  p.  278)  The  utmost  authority 
given  is  to  preach  the  word,  and  to  ad- 
minister the  sacraments.  Whence, 
then,  did  those  presbyters  who  first 
ordained,  derive  that  power.''  The 
ofiice  of  a  presbyter  is  a  gift  mediately 
from  Christ.  But  a  person  who  re- 
ceives a  gift,  receives  just  as  much  as 
the  gift  implies,  and  not  a  tittle  more. 
But  the  power  of  ordaining  was  not  a 
part  of  the  gift  to  the  presbyters  at  the 
leformation.  How  then  could  they 
ordain  others  when  they  were  not 
empowered  so  to  do  ?  "  And  how 
could  prelatists,  when  they  were  never 
so  empowered,  and  are  now  under  ex- 
communication.'' 

4)  See  Lecture  xiii.  p  320. 


292  PRELACY    AND    POPERY    REJECTED.  [lECT.  XII. 

private   use  —  and  included  in  their  edition  of  it,  invocations  to 
the  virgin  Mary  and  other  gross  impieties  ? ' 

"  Look  now  on  this  picture  —  and  on  this." 
Seeing,  then,  that  in  all  these  respects,  the  prelacy  and  the 
papacy  are  distinguished  from  each  other,  though  not  essentially 
distinct ;'  by  what  possible  motive,  is  a  firm  believer  in  the 
fundamental  importance  and  necessity  of  this  doctrine  of  apos- 
tolical succession  to  be  withheld  from  at  once  uniting  with  that 
church,  which  on  this  ground  has  acknowledged  certainty  and 
security,  and  on  other  grounds  is  scarcely  more  objectionable  than 
the  prelacy  itself?  And  how  are  those  to  be  blamed,  who — being 
fully  indoctrinated  in  thislheory,  and  taught  to  seek  "  the  ancient 
things  of  the  catholic  church,"  rather  than  the  true  sayings  of 
God  and  the  doctrines  of  his  word,  and  who  being  led  to 
reverence  and  regard  the  Romish  church  as  their  mother,  and 
to  glory  in  resembling  her  as  much  as  may  be — have  given  their 
preference  to  the  mother,  rather  than  to  her  disowned  and  doubt- 
ful child  ?^  For  ourselves,  we  utterly  reject  the  foundation-prin- 
ciple on  which  the  whole  of  this  superstructure  rests.  We  regard 
it  as  equally  devoid  of  authority  in  God's  word  —  or  in  history  — 
or  in  fact — and  with  it  we  denounce  as  superstitious,  evil,  and 
most  deadly  and  pernicious  to  the  civil  and  the  spiritual  interests 
of  men,  this  whole  mass  of  error.'' 

1)  See  Oxf.  Tr.  No.  7-5,  and  Lon.  priest  should  perform  the  service  with 
Chr.  Obs.  1838,  pp.  710,  743.  his  back   to  the  people,  and  assigns 

2)  Thus,  also.  Bishop  Skinner  this  reason  for  the  practice:  because 
(6th  Lect.  in  Lent,  in  Presb.  Letters,  it  is  written, '  thou  shalt  see  my  back 
p.  397)  says,  "  One  great  reason  why  parts.'  Ex.  xxxiii.  13.  The  real  rea- 
toe,  who  call  ourselves  ministers  of  the  son  is,  to  impress  the  idea  of  the  total 
gospel,  deny  that  there  is  any  proper  separation  and  distinction  between  the 
sacrifice  to  be  offered  in  the  christian  priest  and  the  people  ;  as  if  the  priest 
church,  is  because  our  commission  is  were  performing  some  mystery  apart 
not  such  as  would  justify  our  med-  from  the  laity. 

dling  with   that  essential,  that  awful  3)  See  Newman  on  Rom.  p.  324, 

part  of  the  priestly  office."  "  nothing  but  prudential  motives." 

See  this  connexion  also  fully  estab-  4)  While  the  doctrinal  system  of 
lished  by  numerous  proofs  in  Beverly's  high-church  prelacy  is  thus  so  mani- 
Heresy  of  Human  Priesthood,  Ijond  festly  identical  in  all  that  is  essential 
1839,  Letter  xviii.  p.  74.  We  will  with  Romanism,  it  is  as  plainly  op- 
add  one  illustration  from  p.  77,  Note  :  posed  to  protestantism.     This  will  be 

"  It  is  a  canon  of  piety  with  all  the  at  once  apparent,  from   the  following 

Oxford  school,  that  their  priests  should  contrast,    taken    from     the     London 

turn  their  backs  to  the  people,  during  Record  : 
the  time  of  prayer  in  the  church  ser-  puseyism.  protestantism. 

vice.      For  this  purpose  they  have  their  "THou   dost  soothe    the         "  The  one  ^eat  apostacy 

r_  •*      <  r-U  „»„    1'    „1~™„J  k„r„-„  tU^         hpa.rt,lhoii  church  ofRome!"    from  the  tnith  ;  the  declared 

favorite 'fald- Stool     placed  before  the      -^Lyra  A]«stoiica.  oLject  of   Divine   dispiea- 

altar,  on  which  the  priest  kneels,  with  sure."  — [Bishop  Van  Mii- 

his  face  to  the  stone  cross  on  the  altar            "Rome  was  our  mother,  "The  Church  of   Rome 

and     his    back    to    the  people.       This  is  througli  wliom  we  were  led  wa.    never     our     mother'* 

r       r                     -^  to  Clirist." — f  Fracts  for  tlie  mother;  our  Chnstian  faith 

the  fashion  at  Mr.   Newman  S  church,  Times,  No.  77,  p.  33.  came  not    Irom    the   seven 

at  Littlemore,  near  Oxford.     Pope  In-         ..  s„ip„,e  and  tradition,   *" "  ThTiJr^tie^'nTv™ ofCod 

nocent  III.    in  his  book  on  the  Myste-         taken  together,  are  thejoim    is  the  sole  rule  of  our  faith 
f    »!.        »«  J       'J    J     »u    «     .u  riJlfs  of  fatth." — fibicf,  78,    and     practice." — [Bishop 

nee  of  the   Mass,  decided    that   the      p.  2.  t     .    ,  xomime. 


LECT.  XII.] 


PRELACY    AND    POPERY    IDENTICAL. 


293 


Now  if  prelatists,  or  any  of  them,  will  resent  these  conse- 
quences as  an  unjust  imputation  upon  their  character  and  prin- 
ciples, we  can  only  rejoibe  at  their  inconsistency.  But  that 
they  are  inconsistent  with  their  own  inculcated  tenets,  and  that 
the  Romisli  church  is  only  consistent  —  even  while  apostate  — 
in  carrying  them  out  to  their  legitimate  results,  must,  we  think, 
be  apparent. 

**\Vith  what  face,  then,  with  what  consistency,"  to  resume 
the  argument  of  Mr.  Palmer,  from  which  we  have  already 
quoted,  '^  can  those  who  object  to  these  results  and  conclusions, 
maintain  the  principle  from  which  they  are  inevitably  derived 
—  and  maintain  it  in  common  with  those  wlio  avow  these  conse- 
quences—  and  maintain,  too,  that  identical  succession,  from  which 
these  awful  consequences  have  flowed  ?"^ 

These  church  principles,  therefore,  as  they  are  now 
revived,  difiiised,  and  authenticated,  by  so  many  able  and 
learned  prelatists  —  and  founded,  as  their  great  fundamental  prin- 
ciple, upon  this  doctrine  of  the  apostolical  succession,  "  smell 
rank,"  as  Melville  would  say,  ^^  of  papistry  and  the  arrogancy 
of  the  shavelings."^  ''  These  principles,"  says  their  elaborate 
reviewer,  Mr.  Isaac  Taylor,  ''  embrace  every  element  of  the 
papal  tyranny,  cruelty,  profligacy,  and  spiritual  apostacy,  and  if 


"  Revelation,  wh^^rever 
found,  ia  Scripture  or  an- 
tiquity.^^ — [British  Critic  for 
Jan.1838,  p.  224. 

"The  Sacraments,  not 
preachings,  are  the  sources* 
of  Divine  grace." — f  Adver- 
tisemeut  to  vol.  i.  of  Tracts. 


*'  Intrusted  with  the  aw- 
ful and  mysterious  gift  of 
jiiaking  the  bread  ana  wine 
Christ's  body  and  blood." — 
[Tr.  10,  p.  4,  ed.  of  1834. 

**  The  Church  of  England 
nowhere  restrains  her  chil- 
dren from  praying  for  their 
departed  friends." — [Tbid, 
vol.  iii.  p.  22. 


"  They  wliich  add  tra- 
dition as  a  part  of  super- 
natural, nece^ssary  truth, 
have  not  the  truth,  but  are 
in  error. ' '  —  [Hooker. 

"  It  pleased  God,  by  the 
foolishness  of  preaching-,  to 
save  them  that  believe." — ■ 
ICor.  i.21. 

"  It  is  on  both  sides  con- 
fessed that  the  word  of  God 
outwardly  administered,  (his 
Spirit  inwardly  concurrino; 
therewith,)  converteth,  edi- 
fieth  and  saveth  souls."  — 
Hooker. 

"  As  if  a  man  could  Tnake 
his  Maker."  —  Dr.  Isaac 
Barrow. 


*'  As  the  Scripture  teacheth 
us,  let  ns  think  that  the  soul 
of  man  goeth  straightways 
either  to  heaven  or  tu  heJJ, 
whereof  the  one  needeth  no 
prayer,    and    the    other    is 

without     redemption." 

[Homily  on  Prayer. 

'*  What  doctrine  can  possi- 
bly be  invented  to  cross  and 
contradict  the  scripiurea 
more  plainly  than  this 
doth  ?  ■''^— Bish.  Beveridjre. 
*'  A  church  corrupted  with 
idolatry,  very  much  the 
same,  m  kind  and  degree, 
with  the  worst  that  ever  pre- 
vailed among  the  Egyptians 
or  the  Canaanites  ?"-  [Bish- 
op Hursley. 


"The  Tridentine  Decree 
declares,  that  it  is  ^ood  and 
useful,  supphantly  to  invoke 
the  saints,  and  that  images 
of  Christ,  and  the  Blessed 
Virgin,  and  other  saints, 
should  receive  due  honor 
and  veneration  ;  —  words 
which  themselves  go  to  the 
very  verge  of  what  could  be 
received  by  the  cautious 
christian,  though  possibly 
aAmittins;  of  an  honest  in- 
Itryretailon.^'  —  [Ibid.  71, 
page  17. 

•  If  this  writer  had  referred  to  the  Cliurch  Catechism , 
he  would  have  learnt  from  it  that  the  sacraments  aru  not 
sources  of  grace,  but  means  of  grace. 


*'  The  prevailing"  notion  of       "  Dwell  in  your  discourses 
bringing  forward  the  atone-    ....     on  the  one  sacri- 
ment,  explicitly  and  promi-     fice  of  Christ  once  offered; 
■      on  the  ineiTicacy  of  all  other 
means   ot     atonement ;    on 
Christ    the    only    Mediator 
[Ibid,     and    Intercessor."  —  [Bish- 
op Barrington, 

*'The   known  distinction 
of  mortal  and  venial  sins, 
which  neither  hath  God  ever 
mortal  sins  be  sins  against    allowed,    neither,  while    he 
the  Decalogue,  as  St.  Au-     gainsays    it,  will    ever    the 
gustine  says,  are  they  only     protestaut." — [Bishop  Hall, 
the  highest  degrees  of  those 
sins,  or  are  they  the  lower 
also  ?  "  —  [Preface  to  Tract 
67,  p.  14. 

"  A  theology  which  ditlers 
from  our  own,  in  considering 
that  faith  antl  not  baptU 


nently  on  all 
evidently  quite  opposed  to 
what  we  consider  the  teach- 
ing of  scriptui 
80,  p.  74. 

'*  What  is  the  distinction 
between  lesser  and  greater, 
venial  and  mortal  sins  ?  or  if 


"The  doctrine  of  sacra- 
mental justification  is  justly 
to  be  reckoned  amongst  the 
is  the  primary  instrument  of    most  mischievous  errors  that 
justification."  —  [Newman    are  in  the  Church  of  Rome." 
[Bishop  Burnet. 
The  Bible,  the  Bible  only, 
?ligion   of  proiest- 
[Chillingworth. 


I  Justification,  p.  31 

"  The  argument  of  ultra- 
protestantism  may  be  taken  ; 
and  we  may  say,  *  The  Bible,  ants, 
and  nothing  but  the  Bible,' 
but  this  is  an  unthankful  re- 
jection of  another  great  dlt 
trjually  from  God." —  [Tr. 
71,  p.  8. 

1)  Spiritual  Despot,  pp.  325,  341, 
and  all  chap.  vii.  and  ix ;  see  also 
Lend,  Chr.  Obs.  Nov.  1839,  pp.  659, 
661. 

2)  Neal's  Puritans,  vol.  i.  p.  124. 


294  POPERY  AND  PRELACY  TO  BE  BOTH  REJECTED.       [LECT.  XII. 

left  to  work  themselves  out  according  to  their  proper  quality, 
they  can  have  no  other  issue."  "  It  is  equally  true  that  men 
professing  such  principles,  if  once  seated  in  the  chair  of  power, 
and  holding  an  unchecked  license  to  mould  the  civil  and  eccle- 
siastical constitution  of  a  country  at  their  will,  would  do  nothing 
less  than  establish  a  ghostly  tyranny,  which  in  less  than  a  cen- 
tury must  place  the  lives,  fortunes,  bodies,  and  souls  of  the  com- 
munity, at  the  absolute  disposal  of  a  college  of  priests.'" 

The  argument  of  the  archbishop  of  York  in  the  British  par- 
liament in  1551,  is  still,  therefore,  unanswerable,  and  with  it  we 
will  conclude.  Either  the  church  of  Rome  is  a  true  and  pure 
church,  or  false  and  apostate.  If  true  and  pure,  then  the  An- 
glican church,  being  excommunicated  by  her,  and  separated 
from  her,  is  herself  false,  and  has  no  true  or  valid  succession  on 
which  to  rely.  If,  on  the  contrary,  the  church  of  Rome  is 
apostate,  then  is  her  succession  invalid  and  worthless,  and  the 
Anglican  hierarchy,  however  pure,  is  equally  cut  off  from  any 
true  succession.^  There  is  no  middle  space  between  popery 
and  prelacy.  They  are  in  heart,  in  principle,  one  and  the 
same  —  and,  however  different,  they  are  not  distinct. 

1)  See  Anct.  Christ,  vol.  i.  p  42G.      Bib.  Repert.  1836,  p.  20,  and  Dr.  Ma- 

2)  This   Mr.  Palmer  frequently      son's  Wks.  vol.  iii.  p.  333. 
avows ;  see  vol.  ii.  p.  232 ;  see  also  Ed-  See  Note  B. 

ward's  Preacher,  vol.  ii.  p.  183 ;  see 


ADDITIONAL  NOTES  TO  LECTURE  TWELFTH. 


NOTE  A. 


What  are  we  to  think  of  the  following  pamphlet  which  has  just  been  sent 
forth  ? 

"  A  LETTER  ON  CHRISTIAN  UNION,  ADDRESSED  TO  THE  BISHOPS  OF  THK 
PROTESTANT  EPISCOPAL  CHURCH,  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES,  BY  THE  RIGHT 
REV.  FRANCIS  PATRICK  KENRICK,  RISHOP  OF  ARATH,  AND  COADJUTOR  OF 
THE    BISHOP    OF    PHILADELPHIA." 

We  will  here  give  a  portion  of  this  wonderful  production, and  will  only  ask — 
could  any  one  take  such  liberties  where  no  encouragement  had  been  given  .'' 

"  Right  Reverend  Sirs  :  A  few  years  since,  some  remarks  on  christian  union, 
from  the  pen  of  one  of  your  body,  led  me  to  address  to  him  a  letter, 
wherein  I  extended  the  principles  he  laid  down  to  what  I  conceived  to  be  their 
legitimate  consequences.  At  a  later  period,  an  elaborate  work,  addressed  to 
the  catholic  hierarchy,  by  another  dignitary  of  your  communion,  which  con- 
cluded with  overtures  for  union,  emboldened  me  to  write  a  treatise  in  defence 
of  the  primacy  of  the  apostolical  see,  which  is  the  essential  centre  of  catholic 
unity.  Neither  the  letter  nor  I  he  treatise  has  been  noticed  by  either  of  the 
prelates.  In  the  mean  time,  controversy  beyond  the  Atlantic  has  taken  a  retro- 
grade march,  and,  in  a  celebrated  English  university,  several  points  of  ancient 
faith  and  discipline  have  been  vindicated  with  much  learning  ;  popular  errors 
and  prejudices  have  been  attacked  arid  overthrown  ;  and  principles  have  been 
put  forward,  which  the  admirers  of  the  new  school,  as  well  as  its  adversaries, 
seem  now  to  regard  as  the  preliminaries  to  peace  and  concord  between  the 
Anglican  establishment  and  the  Roman  catholic  church. 

"  The  late  tract  of  the  Rev.  Mr.  Newman  not  obscurely  favors  the  infallible 
authority  of  catholic  councils,  which  he  carefully  distinguishes  from  convoca- 
tions by  royal  authority,  the  inspiration  of  the  books  called  Deutero-Canonical, 
the  seven  sacraments,  purgatory  and  prayers  for  the  dead,  indulgences,  invo- 
cation of  saints,  the  real  presence,  the  sacrifice  of  mass,  and  otiier  controverted 
doctrines.  Whilst  appearing  to  wish  to  guard  the  members  of  the  establish- 
ment from  straggling  towards  Rome,  he  sufficiently  betrays  a  desire  tore-estab- 
lish all  the  ancient  doctrines  in  the  Anglican  church,  that  thus  it  may  be  pre- 
pared for  returning  to  the  communion  of  the  catholic  church.  He  remarks 
that  the  leading  spirits  of  the  age  have  observed  the  many  indications  of  a  gen- 
eral desire  to  return  to  something  that  is  only  to  be  found  in  the  church  of 
Rome,  —  the  reverential  awe  for  the  mysteries  of  faith,  and  the  tenderness  of 
christian  devotion." 

As  it  is  not  our  object  to  oppose  specially  the  Oxford  tracts  —  or  their 
authors  —  or  the  numerous  publications  of  a  similar  character  now  teeming  from 
the  press,  except  so  far  as  they  illustrate  the  spirit  and  tendency  of  high- 
churchism,  whose  principles  have  at  every  period  of  her  history,  found  numer- 
ous advocates  in  the  Church  of  England,  and  an  increasing  number  also  in  the 
American  prelacy  —  we  will  not  refer  to  the  proceedings  which  have  been 
entered  upon  in  opposition  to  the  Oxford  tractalors.  These  are  now  matters 
of  sufficient  notoriety  and  are  omens  for  good. 


296  NOTES    TO    LECTURE    TWELFTH. 


NOTE  B. 

It  is  an  old  adage,  that  a  man  is  known  by  his  friends.  If  this  is  true,  then, 
the  peculiar  favor  shown  by  prelatists  toward  the  Romish  church,  while 
others  are  scornfully  disavowed,  is  a  further  evidence  of  their  relationship. 

"  In  the  American  church,"  says  Mr.  Caswall,  rector  of  Christ's  church, 
Madison,  Indiana,  (Brit.  Crit.  Oct.  1839,  pp.  338,  33'J,  341,)  "the  church  of 
Rome  is  acknowledged,  though  co7-;7/;>i,  to  be  a.  true  church.  Nothing  can  be 
more  exaiMly  worded;  but  if  it  is  a  true  church,  it  must  be  living,  and  if  living, 
it  must  have  the  gifts  of  grace,  whatever  its  corruptions  may  be.  It  cannot  be 
an  outside  only.  It  must  have  a  real  faith,  and  heart,  and  obedience.  It  must 
be  in  the  main  orthodox,  AS  IT  IS;  for  that  church  which  holds  aright  the 
doctrines  of  the  holy  trinity,  incarnation  atonement,  original  sin,  regenera- 
tion, and  the  last  judgment,  we  take  to  be  in  the  main  orthodox. 

"  Now  taking  the  thirty-nine  articles,  as  the  exactestform  of  apostolic  truth, 
still  we  must  consider  that  the  quakers  and  Dutch  reibrmed  deviate  from  them, 
as  far  as  the  Roman  catholics. 

"  The  Rev.  Samuel  Wix,"  says  Mr.  Bristed,  (Thoughts,  &i;.  p.  456,)  "  like- 
wise, is  too  stout  an  exclusive  churchman,  to  desire  to  conciliate,  or  unite 
with  any  protestant  dissenters.  He  prefers  coalescing  with  the  pope,  to  uniting 
with  any  non-episcopalian,  however  sound  in  scriptural  doctrine  ;  however 
fervent  in  evangelical  faith  ;  however  pure  and  holy  in  a  life  regulated  by  the 
precepts  of  his  blessed  Redeemer.  '  No,'  says  he,  '  the  union  is  not  desired 
between  members  of  tlie  (English)  church  and  schismatics  ;  but  between  the 
church  of  Rome,  and  the  church  of  England  ;  if,  indeed,  they  may  be  desig- 
nated as  churches  under  different  names.  Union  is  not,  indeed,  nor  ovght  to 
be  desired  between  the  true  apostolical  church,  and  those  who  renounce  apos 
tolical  discipline  ;  but  union  between  the  church  of  England,  and  the  church 
of  Rome,  on  proper  christian  grounds." 

"The  impiety  of  protestant  non-episcopalians  is  far  more  injurious  to  gospel 
truth,  than  the  errors  attaching  to  the  Roman  catholic  faith." 

The  relationship  of  high-churchism  and  popery  is  thus  graphically  illustrated  : 
(Evang.  and  Lit.  Mag.  vol.  ix,  pp  554,  555.)  In  the  market  place  in  Dublin 
once  —  Ireland  is  the  country  of  the  bishop  of  Limerick,  and  other  high- 
churchmen —  it  was  proclaimed  in  good  Hibernian  brogue,  "I  publish  the 
barms  of  marriage  between  the  church  of  England  and  the  church  of  Rome." 
A  voice  was  heard  in  the  crowd,  "  I  forbid  the  banns  !"  "  For  what  reason  ^  " 
cried  the  herald.  "  Arrah,"  rejoined  the  other,  "  because  the  parties  are  too 
near  akin."  It  is  even  so.  There  is  near  consanguinity  between  high-church 
all  the  world  over.  And  it  requires  attention  and  care,  to  discriminate  between 
what  may  pass  for  tolerable  protestantism,  among  high-churchmen  and  down- 
right popery." 

That  the  very  principles  on  which  prelacy  founds  its  apostolical  traditions, 
have  been  made  tlie  basis  of  tlie  Romisli  traditions,  is  certain. 

"  Besides,  does  not  your  cliurch  in  this  matter  infringe  the  law  of  charity  in 
another  point  of  view,  for  must  not  her  anxious  retaining  and  enforcing  of  her 
ceremonies  tend  to  harden  Roman  catholics  in  their  superstition.'  It  is 
certain  that  it  has  had  this  tendency  in  time  past.  Tims  it  lias  been  shown 
that  Martiall,  from  the  sign  of  the  cross,  as  used  by  you,  vindicates  the  popish 
crossing  ;  that  Parsons  and  Bristowe,  (two  Romish  ccmtroversialists,)  regard 
the  English  Service  Book  as  countenancing  their  Mass  Book  ;  that  the  Rhem- 
ish  divines  extract  from  your  'Absolution  of  the  Sick,'  a  kind  of  approval  of 
their  rites  of  absolution  and  auricular  confession  ;  and  lastly,  justify  their  feast 
of  the  assumption  of  Mary,  by  reference  to  the  various  feasts  observed  by  the 
Church  of  England.  As  a  further  illustration  of  this,  it  is  stated  in  the  life  of 
Bishop  Hall,  that  in  his  voyage  up  the  Maese,he  had  what  he  calls  '  a  danger- 
ous conflict  with  a  Carmelite  friar,  who  argued  from  the  English  protestants,  in- 
sisting on  kneeling  at  the  sacrament,  that  they  recognized  the  doctrine  of  tran- 
substantiation.  '    (Life  of  Bishop  Hall  prefixed  to  his  Contemplations,  p.  Ifi.) 

Mr.  Keble  argues  that  the  deposit  committed  by  Paul  to  Timothy,  (2  Tim. 
1,14,)   "did  comprise   matter,  independent  of,  and   distinct  from,  the  truths. 


NOTES    TO    LECTURE    TWELFTH.  297 

which  are  directly  scriptural" — "church  rules"  and  "a  certain  form, 
arrangement  and  selection  of  the  whole;"  "and  also  a  certain  system  of  church 
practice,  both  in  government,  discipline  and  worship."  (Keble  on  Trad.  4th  ed. 
p.  21.) 

Fuither : "  As  often  as  Tertullianand  Irenfeus  have  false  teachers  to  reprove," 
&c.  "  do  they  not  refer  to  the  tradition  of  tiie  whole  cliurch,  as  to  something 
independent  of  the  written  word,  and  sufficient  at  tliat  time  to  refute  heresy 
even  alone."  (See  p.  ii3.^  "  Do  they  not  employ  church  tradition  as  parallel 
to  scripture,  not  as  derived  from  it.?  and  consequently  as  fixing  the  interpreta- 
tion of  disputed  texts,  not  simply  by  the  judgment  of  the  churcli,  but  by  au- 
thority of  that  Holy  Spirit  which  inspired  the  real  teaching  itself,  of  which  such 
tradition  is  the  record  ?"  (p.  24.)  On  p.  25  he  argues,  that,  had  the  scriptures 
not  been  written  or  perished,  tradition  alone  would  have  been  sufficient  for 
the  whole  christian  world. 

Nay,  he  goes  on  to  say  that  "  apostolical  tradition  was  DIVINELY  appoint- 
ed in  the  church,  as  the  TOUCHSTONE  of  CANONICAL  SCRIPTURE 
ITSELF."  (p.  27.)  And  that  "  its  despisers  are  despisers  of  the  scripture 
itself."  (p.  28.)  And  that  "  where  scripture  is  silent,  or  ambiguous,  consent 
of  the  fathers  is  a  probable  index  of  apostolical  tradition."  (p.  28,  Note.)  It 
is  thus  "  presumption,  irreverence,  to  disparage  (he  fatliers  under  a  plea  of 
magnifying  scripture,"  since  "  the  very  writings  of  the  apostles  were  to  be 
first  tried  by  it,  before  they  could  be  incorporated  into  the  canon."     (p.  28.) 

Nay,  without  this  tradition,  Mr.  Keble  "  does  not  see  how  we  could  now 
retain  real  inward  communion  with  our  Lord,  through  his  apostles."  (p.  38.) 
He  also  encourages  us  to  hope  that  the  church  may  even  yet  "be  so  happy  as  to 
recover  more  "  of  these  "  precious  apostolical  relics,"  by  the  supernatural 
guidance  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  So  that  the  canon  of  inspired  rules  and  doc- 
trine, is  yet  open  to  alteration  or  amendment.     (See  p.  42.) 


38 


LECTURE    XIII. 


THE    PRELATIC    DOCTRINE    OF    APOSTOLICAL    SUCCESSION    INTOLERANT 
IN    ITS    TENDENCIES    AND    RESULTS. 

We  will  now  urge  it  as  a  distinct  argument  against  this  doctrine, 
that  by  its  past  working,  and  the  facts  of  history,  it  is  proved  to  be, 
in  its  necessary  tendency,  intolerant  and  despotic,  antichristian 
and  anti-republican.  On  this  part  of  our  subject,  we  have  am- 
ple materials  on  which  we  might  enlarge,  but  we  will  endeavor 
to  be  brief. 

That  this  doctrine  —  to  wit  —  "  that  there  is  not  one  of  these 
prelates  who  cannot  trace  his  right  to  guide  and  govern  Christ's 
church,  and  to  ordain  its  ministers,  through  a  long  line  of  prede- 
cessors, up  to  the  favored  persons  who  were  consecrated  by  the 
laying  on  of  the  holy  hands  of  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul,'" 
necessarily  tends  to  the  establishment  of  a  spiritual  despotism,  is 
apparent,  not  only  from  its  direct  and  necessary  tendency  to 
popery,  but  also,  as  has  been  in  part  shown,  from  other  consider- 
ations. It  clothes  an  order  of  men  with  a  supremacy  which  is  by 
divine  right  j  and  resistance,  therefore,  to  which,  is  rebellion 
against  God.  It  vests  in  this  separate  and  exclusive  order  of 
ecclesiastical  rulers,  a  separate  jurisdiction,  as  well  legislative, 
executive,  as  judicial ;  and  with  which  there  is  no  right,  in  any 
lower  order,  or  in  the  laity,  to  interfere.  It  asserts  a  claim  of 
implicit  obedience,  on  the  principle  of  faith,  and  not  of  reason, 
to  this  church  authority.  This  obedience  is  made  to  extend  to 
the  canons  put  forth  by  these  ecclesiastics,  as  fully  as  to  the  word 
of  God.*  This  authority  of  prelates,  we  are  expressly  told,  not 
merely  extends  to  those  powers  of  administration  and  of  superin- 

1)  Oxf.  Tr.  vol.  i.  p.  232.  pel   Messenger,   Aug.   1840,   p.  155. 

2)  See  form  of  consecration  by  the      Also  the  British  Critic,  1833,  gp.  489, 
preBentbishopof  Charleston,  in  Gos-      430,445. 


300  PRELATICAL   AUTHORITY   DESCRIBED,  [lECT.  XIII. 

tendence  over  his  clergy,  quce  sunt  ordinis,  but  to  a  separate  au- 
thority which  is  called  jurisdiction  ;  and  "  which  is  vested  in  them 
as  depositaries,  by  tiie  apostles."  This  power  is  indefinite.*  It 
involves  "judicial  proceedings  before  the  bishop  "**  —  and 
"criminal  jurisdiction."  This  jurisdiction  is  further  inherent  in 
the  bishop,  and  emanates  from  the  word  of  God,"  and  "  which 
may  be  demonstrated  to  be  inherent  in  episcopacy."  This 
"  canonical  yoke  "  is  to  "  be  exercised  after  an  inquisition,"  and 
"  the  inquisition  should  be  conducted  with  secrecy,  and  in  a 
summary  manner ; "  for  "  the  principle  on  which  all  church  dis- 
cipline rests,  is  obedience,"  and  "  the  necessity  of  obeying  eccle- 
siastical superiors."^ 

This  authority  of  the  prelates,  who  are,  de  facto,  the  church, 
is  only  limited  by  their  own  good  pleasure  ;  and  our  security 
against  oppression  rests,  we  are  gravely  told,  upon  the  improba- 
bility "  that  the  bishops  would  oppress  their  clergy. ""^  Thus 
does  the  Romish  church  give  us  the  assured  promise  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  that  their  infallibility  will  be  infallibly  right  —  and  both 
on  as  good,  but  no  better  grounds,  than  the  religion  of  Ormuzd, 
which  forbade  the  Persian  despot  to  ordain  any  thing  but  what 
was  good  and  right,  while  at  the  same  time  it  made  right  what- 
ever he  did  ordain  ;  and  secured  to  him  all  authority  to  ordain 
whatsoever  he  pleased. 

This  authority  embraces,  further,  the  interpretation  of  the 
Bible ;  which  is  to  be  determined  by  the  universal  consent  of 
these  prelates,  mysteriously  preserved  through  an  indeterminate 
period,  which  may  be  lengthened  or  abridged  just  as  necessity 
may  require.  It  includes,  also,  the  power  to  decree  rites  and 
ceremonies,  and,  generally,  to  supervise  and  order  the  affairs  of 
the  sanctuary.  In  this  plenitude  of  episcopal  grace,  is  em- 
braced the  power  of  absolution  —  that  most  tremendous  engine 
of  ghostly  tyranny  —  and  the  powers  of  canonization,  consecra- 
tion, and  pronouncing  of  anathemas,  which  are  also  parts  of  this 
invisible  jurisdiction. 

Now  the  very  fact,  that  for  all  this  assumption  of  supreme 
jurisdiction,  prelates  are  without  any  shadow  of  support  in  the 
word  of  God,  has  only  led  them  to  insist  upon  it  with  the  great- 

1)  "  The  indefinite  nature  of  ppis-  '  discipline  within  his  diocese."  Bishop 
copal  jurisdiction."  Cardwell's  Doc-  Gibson  Codex  Juris  Ecclesiast.  Ang- 
uraent.  Annals,  vol. i.  pp.288,  317,412.      lie.  in  Foster's  Exam,  of,  p.  8.     Also, 

2)  "The   office    of  consecration  pp.  10,  18,  47,  51,  103. 
WARRANTS  evcry  bishop  to  claim   by  3)  See  an  Art.  on  Ecclesiastical 
THK  WORD  OF   GoD  for  the  correcting  Discipline  in  the  British  Critic,  April, 
and  punishing  such  as  bo  unquiet, dis-  1839,  pp.  447,  44G,  429,  430,  &c. 
obedient,  and  criminous,  (i.  e.)  for  the              4)  Brit.  Crit.  1839,  App.  p.  447, 
exercise  of  all  manner  of  spiritual  and  Oxf  Tr.  vol.  i.  p.  327. 


LECT.  XIII.]       THE    GROWTH    OF   PHELATICAL    MODESTY.  301 

er  earnestness,  and  to  enforce  it  with  sterner  measures  of  com- 
pulsory benevolence.  For  it  being  once  assumed,  that  such  an 
order,  with  such  rights  and  duties,  is  essential  to  the  existence 
of  the  church,  and  the  church  to  the  salvation  of  souls  ;  of 
course,  all  measures  became  necessarily  right,  and  even  merci- 
ful, by  which  this  authority  of  prelates  might  be  sustained 
against  heretics  and  opposers.' 

Hence  we  find  the  earliest  of  the  order,  as,  par  eminence, 
Ignatius,  leaning  upon  authority,  for  the  preservation  of  their 
asserted  dignity  ;  and  thus  "  laying  the  first  steps  of  the  papal 
pandemonium,'"^  in  their  sacerdotal  ambition.  This  prelatical 
arrogance  had  reached  a  height  of  preposterous  extravagance, 
as  early  as  the  third  and  fourth  centuries ;  and  was  unquestiona- 
ably  based  upon  the  perversions  of  truth,  and  the  corruptions  of 
gospel  simplicity,  introduced  as  early  as  the  first  century.^  The 
martyr  church  thus  became  itself,  by  its  inherited  principles, 
the  executioner  of  countless  multitudes  of  martyrs.  The  prel- 
ates, at  least  some  of  them,  of  the  Cyprianic  and  following 
ages,  seem  to  have  been  filled  to  overflowing  with  the  most 
enormous  notions  of  spiritual  transcendency,  and  divine  prerog- 
ative ;  and  really  to  have  believed,  that  they  were  ordained  as 
the  means  of  "  immediate  connexion  between  God  and  man  — 
the  chain  between  time  and  eternity."'*      Heaven   and   earth 

1)  See  Athanasius,  in  Potter  on  errors  into  the  true  faith  ;  and  if  the 

Ch.  Govt.  p.  171.  Chrysostom,  p.  173.  actual  infliction  of  death  upon  him 

Cyprian,  pp.  164,  161.  will  deter   others  from    injuring  their 

"  The   following  just  remarks  are  own  souls  by  the  same  or  like  errors, 

from  an  article    in    a  late  number  of  does    not    philanthropy    require    the 

the  American  Biblical  Repository  :  stroke.''     One  of  the  popes,  in  a  let- 

"  Real  intolerance,  the  intolerance  ter  enjoining  all  true  followers  of  the 
of  the  heart,  is  seldom  or  never  seen  church  to  ferret  out  heretics,  and  pun- 
by  the  possessor  in  its  true  light.  It  ish  them  with  death  if  they  proved 
is  sincere,  indeed;  but  there  can  be  obstinate,  sustains  his  injunction  by 
no  more  hurtful  form  of  bigotry  than  the  following  argument :  '  The  man 
that  of  deluded  fanaticism.  Instiga-  who  takes  away  physical  life,  is  pun- 
ted by  this  spirit,  men  are  guilty  of  ished  with  death.  Now,  faith  is  the 
unrighteous  oppression,  and  verily  source  of  rtc?'Wflnife  ;  for  it  is  written  : 
think  they  are  doing  God  service.  '  The  just  shall  live  by  faith.'  How 
Persecutors  and  persecuted,  in  multi-  much  more  guilty,  then,  than  a  com- 
tudes  of  instances,  have  been  alike  mon  murderer,  and  how  much  more 
animated  with  sincere  zeal  for  what  worthy  of  death,  must  a  heretic  be, 
they  considered  the  right.  '  There  who  robs  people  of  their  faith  —  of 
can  be  no  doubt,'  says  the  persecutor,  eternal  life  !  ' 

'  that  my  views  are  correct,  and  that  "  Such  is  the  sophistry  with  which 

he  who  does  not  adopt  them  endan-  intolerance  has  in  all  ages  deceived, 

gers  his  spiritual  welfare.     It  must  be  or  sought  to  defend  itself." 

a  benevolent  act  to  appeal  to  the  tem-  2)  Spiritual  Despotism,  pp.  402, 

poral  interests  of  my  neighbor  for  the  491. 

good   of  his   soul.     Therefore   I   am  3)  Osborne's    Doctr.     Errors    of 

bound  to  try,  by  pains  and  penalties,  the  Apostl.  Fathers,  ch.  xi. 

yes,  if  it  be  necessary,  by  the  menace  4)  Sec  Chrysostom  on  the  Priest- 

of  death  itself,  to  bring  him  from  his  iiood. 


302  THE    GROWTH    OF    PRELATICAL    POWER.  [LECT.  XIII. 

were  too  poor,  and  kings  too  humble,  to  afford  apt  illustrations 
of  the  supereminence  of  their  pontifical  glory.  To  say  aught 
against  their  order,  or  to  do  aught  in  contravention  to  their  de- 
cisions, was  sure  to  call  down  upon  the  guilty  head  the  most 
summary  vengeance,  —  deposition,'  excommunication,  and  the 
brand  of  infamous  schism,  heresy,  and  conspiracy  with  the  dev- 
il." Presbyters  were  in  due  season  excluded  from  all  synods 
and  councils ;  and  in  many  cases,  not  even  allowed  to  preach  in 
the  prelate's  presence,  or  only  as  permitted  by  him.^  The  laity 
were  also  deprived  of  all  representation,  in  the  government  of 
the  church,  by  the  express  authority  of  that  passage  of  scrip- 
ture, which  teaches  us,  that  "it  was  not  for  beasts  to  touch  the 
mount  of  God."*  All  remonstrance  was,  in  this  way,  effectual- 
ly silenced,  and  borne  down,  and  the  very  memory  of  it  oblitera- 
ted from  the  knowledge  of  posterity.  "The  spiritual  despotism 
that  spoke  in  the  popes,  is  now,"  as  has  been  said,  "  sixteen 
hundred  years  old."^  The  connexion  of  prelacy,  as  exhibited 
in  the  superstitious  and  tyrannous  polity  pursued  from  the  sec- 
ond century,  downwards,  with  the  Romish  hierarchy  ;  was  acci- 
dental, and  does  not,  by  any  means,  constitute  it  what  it  ever 
was,  and,  when  unchecked,  ever  will  be,  human  nature  being 
what  it  is.  When  unlimited  authority  is  committed  to  a  few 
rulers,  with  the  power  to  judge  between  themselves  and  all  who 
resist  them,  and  when  this  power  is  sustained  by  the  believed 
sanction  of  an  immediate  divine  intercourse,  and  communica- 
tion, —  what  can  prevent  it  from  consolidating  into  the  most  in- 
tolerant despotism  ?  And  again,  let  it  be  borne  in  mind,  the  very 
soul  of  such  a  system,  is  the  doctrine  of  a  supernatural  efScacy, 
resident,  by  right  of  transmitted  inheritance,  in  a  line  of  prelati- 
cal  successors.® 

1)  See  as  an  illustration,  the  con-  3)  See  Note  A. 

duct  of  Cyprian  as  quoted  in  Potter  on  4)  Spiritual  Despot,  p.  476.   That 

Ch.  Govt.  pp.  165,  166.  they    anciently    participated    in    the 

2)  "  Thus,"  says  Professor  Powell  management  of  church  affairs  in  Eng- 
in  his  Tradition  Unveiled,  (p.  56,)  "  by  land,  see  fully  shown  in  Foster's  Ex- 
virtue  of  this  celebrated  '  Disciplina  amination  of  the  Scheme  of  Ch.  Pow- 
Arcani,'  the  tenets  of  any  who  ven-  er,  of  the  Codex  Juris  Eccl.  Anglic, 
tured  to  oppose  them,  were  unanswer-  pp.  75,  84.  He  also  shows  that  the 
ably  proved  heretical,  and  the  catholic  exclusion  of  the  laity  was  owing  to 
faith  was  found  to  possess  a  more  and  the  over-ruling  power  of  the  church 
more  precise  and  metaphysical  form,  of  Rome.     See  p.  84. 

They   had   the   power  in   their  own  5)  Ibid.  p.  291. 

hands;  and  with  an  ascendency  and  6)  The  history  of  this  progressive 

a  majority,  it  was  easy  by  arts  and  system  of  church  power,  is  thus  given 

practices,  obvious  even  to  men  less  by  Sir  Michael  Foster  in  his  Exami- 

ekilled  in  the  knowledge  of  human  nation  of  Bishop    Gibson,  third   ed. 

nature  and  the  means  of  influencing  1736,  p.  12. 

it,  to  maintain  that  ascendency,  and  "  I  take   the   case,  with  regard  to 

advance  it  even  to  an  exclusive  do-  ecclesiastical    jurisdiction,    to     have 

minioQ.'^  been  thus  :  when  Christianity  became 


LECT.  XIII.]  THE   GROWTH   OF   PRELATICAL   POWER. 


303 


The  resulting  effects  of  every  doctrine,  especially,  if  they 
have  been  found  invariably  consequent,  when  not  hindered  by 
some  counteracting  agency,  are  allowed  to  be  a  fair  test  of  its 
inherent  character  and  tendency.'     We  must  judge  of  a  system 


the  public  religion  of  the  empire,  the 
laity,  who  in  the  earlier  ages  bore  a 
part  in  the  provincial  and  diocesan 
consistory,  finding  themselves  at  ease 
from  persecution,  began  to  apply  with 
more  attention  to  their  secular  affairs, 
and  lefl  church  matters  to  the  bishop 
and  his  clergy  ;  the  clergy  being,  for 
the  most  part,  settled  at  their  respec- 
tive cures,  at  too  great  a  distance  from 
the  mother  church  to  admit  of  a  con- 
stant attendance  at  the  diocesan  con- 
sistory ;  or  perhaps,  from  a  high 
opinion  of  the  wisdom  and  integrity 
of  their  president,  were  contented  to 
leave  the  principal  weight  of  church 
government  in  his  hands,  especially 
when  they  looked  on  it  as  a  barren 
point  of  pre-eminence,  attended  with 
no  profit  or  distinction  to  compensate 
the  burden  it  brought  with  it.  I  be- 
lieve it  will  appear  upon  inquiry,  that 
episcopal  jurisdiction  had  originally 
no  better  a  foundation  than  what  1 
have  mentioned.  But  the  first  ciiris- 
tian  emperors,  finding  the  bishops  in 
possession  of  a  nominal  authority,  in- 
vested them  with  a  real  jurisdiction, 
which  by  the  concessions  of  succeed- 
ing princes  increased,  till  the  bishops 
came  to  have  cognizance,  not  only  of 
such  matters  as  now  make  the  proper 
business  of  the  ecclesiastical  courts, 
but  of  many  others,  which  the  wisdom 
of  later  times  hath  restored  to  the  civil 
judicature." 

"  But,  on  the  other  hand,  let  it  be 
granted  that  episcopal  jurisdiction  is 
of  divine  right,  and  let  the  imagina- 
tion be  well  heated  with  the  beauty 
and  expediency  of  ranks,  degrees  and 
orders  in  the  church;  and  we  shall 
find  it  not  so  difficult  as  some  may 
imagine  for  weak  people  to  advance 
in  their  conceits  from  prelates  to  pri- 
mates, and  thence  to  patriarchs. 
King  James  I.  had,  or  pretended  to 
have,  a  zeal  for  the  divine  right  of 
episcopal  jurisdiction ;  but  he  could 
not  stop  there  :  his  principles  carried 
him  up  to  the  spiritual  supremacy  of 
the  pope,  to  whom  he  decljures  him- 
self willing  to  submit,  as  patriarch  of 
the  west,  and  Primus  Episcopus  inter 
omnes  Episcopos,  et  Princeps  Episcopo- 


rum;  even,  says  his  majesty,  as  Peter 
was  Princeps  Jipostolorum.  [First 
bishop  amongst  all  the  bishops,  and 
chief  of  the  bishops;  even,  says  his 
Majesty,  as  Peter  was  chief  of  the 
apostles.] 

"  1  would  not  be  understood  to  in- 
sinuate that  the  supremacy  of  the 
pope  is  a  necessary  consequence  from 
the  divine  right  of  episcopal  jurisdic- 
tion. But  I  believe  1  may  venture  to 
affirm,  that  the  divine  right  appropri- 
ated to  ecclesiastics  is  the  cursed  root 
of  bitterness  from  whence  the  papal 
supremacy  sprung.  And  if  the  princi- 
ple of  a  right  of  jurisdiction,  underived 
from  the  civil  magistrate,  doth  not 
always  lead  to  the  popery  of  the 
church  of  Rome,  it  leads  to  a  state  of 
things  equally  mischievous  and  more 
absurd, —  1  mean  a  popery  at  our  own 
doors.  Our  ancestors  at  and  about 
the  time  of  the  reformation  had  plain- 
ly this  notion  of  the  matter;  and 
therefore  they  did  not  content  them- 
selves with  barely  abolishing  the 
usurped  power  of  the  bishop  of  Rome, 
but  went  to  the  root  of  the  evil,  and 
declared  that  all  jurisdiction,  as  well 
ecclesiastical  as  civil,  is  vested  in,  and 
exercised  by  delegation  from,  the 
Crown." 

1)  Oxf  Tr.  vol.  i.  p.  327. 

"  The  connexion,"  says  Dr.  How, 
in  his  Vindication  of  the  Episcopal 
Church,  (N.  York,  1816,  p.  76,)  "  be- 
tween principle  .^nd  practice  is  most 
intimate.  What,  indeed,  is  practice 
but  embodied  principle  ?  The  charac- 
ters of  men  are,  every  where,  formed, 
in  a  greater  or  less  degree,  by  the 
opinions  which  they  entertain.  Among 
the  various  sects  of  ancient  philoso- 
phers, how  constantly  do  we  see  their 
principles  exemplified  in  their  lives  ! 
In  truth,  the  doctrines  which  any  par- 
ticular society  may  embrace,  will,  in 
time,  mould  and  determine  the  char- 
acter of  that  society.  Haughty  prin- 
ciples, as  a  general  rule,  will  produce 
haughty  conduct ;  licentious  princi- 
ples will  produce  licentious  conduct ; 
virtuous  principles  will  produce  vir- 
tuous conduct." 


304  PRELATES    HISTORICALLY    DESCRIBED.  [lECT.  XUI. 

by  its  essential  principles,  and  not  by  any  occasional  manifesta- 
tions it  may  make.  Now,  from  a  very  early  period  in  the  his- 
tory of  the  church,  no  complaint  is  more  frequently  and  loudly 
made,  by  church  writers,  than  that  which  bears  upon  the  de- 
generacy, corruption,  and  tyranny,  of  these  rulers  and  gover- 
nors. Tlie  rulers,  says  Chrysostom,  after  depicting  the  misera- 
ble condition  of  the  church,  are  more  guilty  than  any  others.' 
Augustine  represents  the  church  as  in  a  worse  bondage,  through 
their  impositions,  than  it  was  under  the  law.**  Nazianzen  com- 
plains of  the  prelates,  who,  when  they  had  overrun  all  things 
with  violence,  in  fine,  tyrannized  over  piety  itself.'  To  escape 
from  their  impositions,  Jerome,  as  Erasmus  thinks,  betook  him- 
self to  a  cell.  Chrysostom  assures  us  that  he  feared  nothing  so 
much  as  prelates.*  Theophilus  of  Alexandria  declares,  that  the 
audaciousness  and  tyranny  of  the  bishops,  before,  had  ruined  the 
nation,  and  dispersed  the  people  through  the  world.* 

Isidore  of  Pelusium  declares,  that  prelacy,  as  divers  exer- 
cised it,  is  a  tyrannical  licentiousness,  because  they  turned  it 
into  domination,  or  rather,  to  speak  freely,  unto  tyranny.*^  He 
further  says,  that  there  were  very  few  not  thus  guilty,  and  these 
were  afraid  to  speak  out  against  them.''  The  tyranny  of  the 
prelates  hindered  any  reformation.*  Prosper  thus  bewails  this 
matter  :  "  But  we,  delighted  with  things  present,  while  we 
hunt  after  the  advantages  and  honors  of  this  life,  make  all  haste 
to  be  prelates,  not  that  we  may  be  better,  but  richer  ;  nor  that 
we  may  be  more  holy,  but  more  honored."  "  We  decline  the 
labor  of  our  oflice,  affecting  only  the  profit  and  the  dignity. "» 
This  judgment  is  confirmed  by  Ambrose,  and  almost  every  writer. 
The  pride,  ignorance,  and  superciliousness,  of  even  the  chief  of 
the  western  prelates,  is  exposed  by  Basil ;  while  in  the  east,  as 
Sozomen  declares,  they  were  sick  of  their  unworthy  prelates, 
and  languishing  for  want  of  some  who  would  be  truly  pastors.'" 
What  better  could  be  expected,  says  Chrysostom,  when  the 
dignity  is  put  to  sale,  and  he  carries  it,  not  who  has  the  richest 
land,  but  the  fullest  purse."  Thus  were  the  prelates  generally 
the  worst  of  their  day,  and  their  authority  so  degenerately  abused, 

1)  Homil.29,in  Act.  testimonies  see  Socrates'  Hist.  lib.  vii' 

2)  August.  Epist.  119,  Januario  ch.  vii.  and  ch.  xi.  Canon,  in  Cod. 
c.  19.  clxxviii.  and  canon  xii. 

3)  Orat.  in  laud.  Athanas.  21.  9)  Prosper  de  vit.  Contempl.  1.  i. 

4)  Epist.  13,  and  ep.  2.  c.  ii. 

5)  In  Georg.  Alex,  vet  Chysost.  10)  Ambrose  de  Sacerd.  degnit. 
c.  39.  cap.     V.      Nazianzen     Orat.    Fiineb. 

6)  Isid.  1.  V.  ep  xxi.  and  epist.  ad  Athanas.  et  Orat.  in  laud.  Basil, 
theod.  cxxv.  leb.  ii.  Basil  epist.  xvi. 

7)  Ibid,  ep.  Ixxxix.  1.  v.  11)  Horn,  in  Ephes.  and  Isid.  1.  v. 

8)  Ibid,  1.  iii.  ep.  223.     For  other  ep.  276,  470. 


LECT.  XIII.]  PRELACY   ALWAYS    DESPOTIC.  305 

that  Theophilus,  of  Alexandria,  rather  than  be  controlled  by 
any  that  were  wise  and  prudent,  as  George,  ol"  Alexandria,  and 
Palladius  both    affirm,  actually  filled  the  vacant  see  with  fools.* 

Such  is  the  representation  given  of  the  practical  working  of 
this  theory,  as  drawn  even  by  its  advocates  and  its  administra- 
tors. We  may  well  believe,  therefore,  all  that  is  charged  upon 
it  by  the  unvarying  testimony  of  history.''  "  Episcopacy,  as 
developed  in  this  theory  of  succession,"  says  Professor  Powell. 
a  methodist  clergyman  in  England,  "  as  it  has  hitherto  existed 
in  the  christian  church,  has  been  at  the  head  of  nearly  all  the 
oppression  and  persecution  that  have  been  found  in  the  church 
to  the  present  day.  I  believe  abuse  very  early  got  into  the 
church  in  an  unguarded,  uncontrolled  form  of  episcopacy.  It 
degenerated  into  tyranny  of  the  worst  kind.  Popery  is  its 
genuine  offspring.^  Let  no  man  trust  an  unguarded  episco- 
pacy," says  he,  "  it  will  do  what  it  has  always  done,  viz.  de- 
generate into  popery."*  Protestantism  had  its  worst  enemies 
among  the  apostolical  succession  bishops.  I  rejoice  to  ex- 
cept, after  that  time,  such  hallowed  names  as  Cranmer,  Laiimer, 
Ridley,  Hooper,  and  Jewell ;  but  they  are  the  exceptions  and 
not  the  rule.  And  it  must  be  confessed,  that  since  that  time 
all  the  persecution  of  the  puritans  and  nonconformists  originated 
generally  with  the  bishops."* 

The  bigoted  intolerance  of  the  Romish  church  was  not 
abandoned  when  England  separated  from  Rome.  Popery  still 
lived  in  the  prelacy,  and  prelates  were  still  found  to  be  ani- 
mated with  the  spirit  of  popes.  The  inquisition  was  perpetu- 
ated in  the  star  chamber  and  high  commission  court,  and  all 
difference  of  opinion  brought  to  the  test  of  power,  and  decided 
in  the  court  of  civil  pains  and  penalties,  of  fines,  imprisonments, 
and  death." 

No  sooner  was  prelatic  authority  fully  established  under  the 

1)  Isid.  1.  V.  ep.  481,  and  1.  ii.  ep.  3)  On  Apost.  Success,  p.  143. 

1.  Georg,  Alex,  vit.  Chrysost.  pp.202,  4)  That  popery  would  have  been 

203,  and  cap.  xx.  p.   185.     Sozonien  the  result  but  for  the   puritans,  &c. 

lib.  viii.  c.  vii.  see  Edwards'  Preacher,  vol.  ii.  p.  183. 

See  these  and  many  other  testimo-  Life  of  Whitgift,  p.  105,  ed.  1699,  and 

nies  quoted  in  the  original  in  Clarkson  Hanbury's  Hooker,  vol.  i.  pp.  33,   34. 

on  Liturgies,  pp.  18.5-198,  Lond.lGbO,  5)  Powfell  ut  supra,  p.  144.     See 

and   ibid.  Primitive  Episcopacy,  pp.  also  Neal's  Puritans,  vol.  ii.  pp.  3C2, 

217-219, 1688.  368,  370,  496,  vol.  iii.  pp.  7,  72,  et 

2)  Ep.  1.  Georg.  Alex.  passim.  Howitt's  Hist,  of  Priestcraft, 
Hierarchical  Despotism  was,  as  Mr.  pp.  115,  167,  180. 

Taylor  argues,  one  of  the  four   first  6)  See  the  spirit  and  tendency  of 

characteristics  of  the  ancient  church,  prelacy  illustrated  by  a  chronolooical 

and     altogether     irreconcilable    with  series  of  facts,  in  "  An   Answer  to  a 

apostolic    Christianity.     See    Ancient  Book    entitled    an    Humble    Renion- 

Christ.  vol.    ii.    part    vi.     Advertise-  strance,"  in  which  the  original  of  lit- 

nient,  p.  6,  and  the  following  part  vii.  urgy    and    episcopacy   is    discussed. 

as  there  promised.  °  Written     by    Smectymnuus,     Lond 

39 


306 


PEELATIC   TYRANNY    IN    ENGLAND.  [lECT.  XIII. 


preposterous  and  horrid  tyranny  of  the  theocratic  monarchs, 
tlian  Archbishop  Bancroft,  in  1588,  declared  the  prelatic  order 
to  be,  by  divine  right,  the  first  order  in  the  church,  the  only 
medium  of  divine  grace,  —  and  that  all  other  ministers  not  or- 
dained by  their  manipulation,  were  spurious  and  without  any 
authority.  Thus  was  opened  a  fountain  of  bitterness,  from 
whose  pestilent  stream  England  is  now  suffering  in  the  schisms, 
feuds,  and  animosities  within  the  hierarchy;  —  and  in  all  the 
endless  divisions  of  those  without,  and  which  are  justly  attributa- 
ble to  these  principles. 

Thus  did   this  single  doctrine  become  the    fruitful  source    of 
evils,  perhaps   now   only   ripening   to  their  dreadful    maturity, 


1641.  Postscript,  pp.  85-94.  Old 
South  Library. 

See  also,  "A  speech  of  William 
Thomas,  Esquire,  in  Parliament  in 
May,  1641,  being  a  short  view  and 
examination  of  the  actions  of  bishops 
in  parliament,  from  anno  dom.  1116, 
to  this  present  of  1641,  in  the  several 
reigns  of  the  kings  and  queens  of  this 
kingdom  of  England,  &,c."  In  all  and 
each  of  their  times  it  is  made  to  appear 
they  have  been  most  obnoxious  to 
prince  and  people,  and  therefore  that 
it  is  not  fit  or  convenient  that  they 
should  continue  members  of  that  hon- 
orable house,  in  which  they  have  been 
so  disloyally  and  traitorously  affected 
to  regality,  and  no  less  mischievous 
and  pernicious  to  church  and  com- 
monwealth. Printed  at  London  by 
Tho.  Harper,  1641 .  See  Baxter's  Five 
Disputations  of  Church  Govt.  p.  244. 
"  It  will  not  be  denied,"  says  Sir  Mi- 
chael Foster  in  his  Exam,  of  Bishop 
Gibson's  Codex  Juris  Eccl.  Angl.  pp. 
46,47,— 

"  It  will  not  be  denied  that  our  ec- 
clesiastical affairs  were  under  a  mere 
clerical  administration  from  the  year 
1628  to  the  meeting  of  the  long  parlia- 
ment ;  a  period  remarkably  infamous 
for  a  series  of  weak,  angry,  ill-concert- 
ed measures  ;  measures  calculated  to 
beget  in  weak  minds  a  veneration  to- 
wards the  hierarchy,  but  executed 
with  a  pedantic  severity  which  pro- 
duced a  quite  contrary  effect.  Cer- 
tain enthusiastic  conceits  concerning 
the  external  beauties  of  religion,  and 
the  necessity  of  a  general  uniformity 
in  the  business  of  holy  garments,  holy 
seasons,  significant  gestures,  church 
utensils  and  ornaments,  seem  to  have 
been  the  ruling  principles  of  those 
times.  These  filled  the  gaols  with 
church  criminals,  and  sent  thousands 


of  our  most  useful  hands  to  seek  their 
bread  in  foreign  parts.  Through  the 
influence  these  principles  had  on  our 
spiritual  governors,  multitudes  of 
learned  and  conscientious  preachers 
were  silenced,  and  exposed  at  once  to 
the  two  greatest  trials  which  can  befal 
human  nature,  public  infamy  and 
remediless  want.  These  principles 
alone,  and  a  conduct  on  our  part  suited 
to  them,  broke  our  union  with  the  re- 
formed churches  abroad,  and  foment- 
ed a  war  in  Scotland  ;  which,  together 
with  a  general  alienation  of  affections 
at  home,  occasioned  in  great  measure 
by  a  rigorous  exercise  of  ecclesiastical 
discipline,  prepared  things  for  that 
scene  of  misery  which  ended  in  the 
ruin  of  our  constitution.  These  were 
the  effects  of  an  administration  purely 
sacerdotal  in  matters  commonly  called 
spiritual !  And  though  his  lordship 
is  pleased  to  say,  that  there  are  few 
times  in  which  the  church  hath  not 
been  a  sufferer  under  a  different  man- 
agement, 1  believe  it  would  puzzle  a 
wise  man  to  show  wherein  the  church 
hath  been  a  greater  sufferer  than  in 
the  effects  of  Laud's  administration, 
which  takes  in  the  whole  period  1  have 
mentioned.  For  though  he  did  not 
get  to  Canterbury  till  the  year  1633, 
he  was,  notwithstanding,  prime  min- 
ister for  ecclesiastical  affairs  from  the 
moment  he  was  advanced  to  the  see 
of  London,  (an.  1628.") 

"  Were  the  severities  exercised  to- 
wards the  poor  Wickliffiles  conducive 
to  the  ends  of  religion  and  the  interest 
of  the  church  of  God.''  They  were 
the  genuine  effects  of  sacerdotal  coun- 
cils. The  laws,  1  say,  under  which 
the  Wickliffites,  our  elder  brethren  in 
the  reformation,  suffered,  were  made 
at  the  special  petition  of  the  clergy. 
His  lordship  informs  us,  (c.  402,)  that 


LECT.  Xni.]         THE   PRELATIC    TEMPER    STILL    INDULGED.  307 

—  as  Mahomet  concealed  behind  the  truth  that  there  is 
one  God,  the  multitudinous  absurdities  of  his  system. 
Puritanism,  nonconformity,  and  dissent  in  all  its  forms, 
were  forced  upon  a  reluctant  and  long-patient  people,  by 
the  urgency  of  this  doctrine,  as  practically  enforced,  under  the 
arbitrary  measures  of  Laud,  and  his  ghostly  successors.  "  The 
early  intolerance  of  our  English  reformation,  necessitated  and 
justified,"  says  Mr.  Taylor,  "  the  noble  resistance  made  to  it, 
first  by  the  puritans,  and  then  by  the  non  conformists."^ 

Nor  is  this  intolerance  of  the  English  church  now  obsolete.  It 
is  still  found  in  her  declarations ;  it  still  blackens  her  formu- 
laries ;  is  fanned  by  the  church,  and  "  lingers  in  the  tempers  and 
upon  the  tongues  of  many  of  its  ministers."^  This  old  leaven 
of  popish  intolerance  yet  "  pervades  the  church,  and  infects  the 
clerical  order  to  a  degree  that  involves  the  establishment  in 
extreme  danger."^  "  It  is  but  little  understood,"  adds  this 
writer,  "  to  how  great  an  extent  throughout  the  country  the 
church  is  putting  the  whole  of  her  credit  and  future  influence  at 
jeopardy,  by  the  inconsiderate  and  ill-timed  arrogance  of  her 
clergy."''  "  The  same  stern  theoretic  pride  from  which  Rome 
drew  her  reasons  of  intolerance,  is  maintained,  sometimes 
openly,  and  often  indirectly,  and  insidiously,  by  staunch  church- 
men, in  this  enlightened  age."*  And  what  is  that  theory,  from 
which  such  consequences  ensue  ?  Let  this  episcopal  writer 
again  state  it.  "  Episcopacy  on  this  theory  is  a  divine  institu- 
tion : —  the  whole  efficacy  of  the  gospel,  and  the  saving  virtue 

the  statute  of  the  2nd  of  Henry  IV-  this  their  own  parliament  cease  not  to 

was  so  :  and  Sir  Robert  Cotton,  speak-  rage  and  roar  against  christian  blood, 

ing  of  that   act,  says,  *  This  was   the  tanquam  leones  rugientcs  —  for  who- 

first  statute  and  butcherly  knife  that  ever  did  the  fault,  they  cried,  crucify 

the  impeaching  prelates  procured  or  Christ,  and  deliver  to  us  Barabbas.'  " 

had    against    the    poor    preachers   of  "  But  I  will  not  pursue  an  invidious 

Christ's    gospel.'  — '  At    this    time,'  task  :  it  is  sutlicient  to  have  just  men- 

(8th  Henry  IV.,)  says  the  same  wri-  tioned  some  of  our  parliamentary  pro- 

ter,    '  the    clergy    suborned    Henry,  ceedings  in  favor  of  the  church  and 

Prince,   in  the  name  of  the   bishops  clergy,  which  appear    to  have   taken 

and  lords,  of  Sir  John  Tibbot,  speaker,  their  rise    from   the  petitions   of  the 

in  name  of  the  commons,  to  exhibit  a  clergy  themselves." 

long  and   bloody  bill  against  certain  See    Note  C. 

persons     called     Lollards  ;     namely,  1)  Spiritual  Despotism,  p.  361. 

against  them  that  preached  or  taught  2)     See     Spiritual     Despot,    pp. 

any  thing  against  the  temporal  livings  350-362,  349. 

of  the  clergy.  —  Wherein  note  a  most  On  the  intolerant  spirit  manifested 

unlawful  and  monstrous  tyranny  :  for  by  the  abettors  of  these  principles,  see 

the  request  of  the  same  bill  was,  that  the  conduct  of  Mr.   Newman  and  his 

every  officer,  or  otiier  minister  what-  associates    toward   Dr.  Hampden,  as 

soever,  might  apprehend  and  inquire  described  by  Archbishop  VVhateley,  in 

of  such  Lollards,  without  any  other  Edinb.  Review,  April,  1841,  p.  157. 

commission  ;    and  that    no  sanctuary  See  also  Note  C. 

should  hold  them.'     The  same  writer,  3)  Spiritual  Despot,  p.  407. 

speaking  of  the  parliament  held  in  the  4)  Ibid.  p.  404. 

5th  of  Henry  V.,  says, '  The  clergy  at  5)  Ibid.  p.  405. 


308  THIS   INTOLERANCE    EPISCOPALLY   DESCRIBED.     [lECT.  XIII. 

of  its  sacraments,  have  been  formally  attached  to  this  institution ; 
those  therefore  who  reject  it,  reject  the  conditions  of  salvation  ; 
and  we  dare  not  tell  them  they  can  be  saved.  In  plain  words, 
all  separatists  from  the  episcopal  church,  whatever  piety  they 
may  seem  to  possess,  are  destined  to  perdition  !" 

"  Church  principles,  as  at  present  professed,  indulge  men  with 
a  degree  of  liberty  of  mquiry,  which  the  Romish  church  con- 
sistently, and  mercifully,  as  well  as  absolutely  prohibits.  But, 
if  any  room  be  left  for  freedom  of  thought  and  inquiry,  intelli- 
gent men,  looking  to  the  general  and  uniform  tenor  of  history, 
can  come  to  no  other  conclusion,  than  that  Christianity,  if  it  is 
to  be  understood,  as  the  advocates  of  church  principles  do  un- 
derstand it,  must  always  be,  as  it  ever  has  been,  the  nurse  of 
superstition,  the  guardian  of  ignorance,  the  sister  of  despotism, 
and  the  promoter  of  cruelty.  Nothing  can  exempt  the  religion 
of  Christ  from  these  fatal  reproaches,  if  those  doctrines  are 
really  part  and  parcel  of  it  which  the  papacy  did  but  amplify 
and  realize.  Infidels  may  confidently  say  —  '  if  the  early  and 
Nicene  church  did  truly  interpi'et  the  gospel,  then  the  popery  of 
the  middle  ages,  is  what  we  have  to  look  to,  as  the  final  resting 
place  to  which  it  will  lead  us.  If  we  are  not  to  think  at  all,  in 
matters  of  religion,  we  had  better  at  once  take  refuge  in  the 
bosom  of  the  church  of  Rome  :  but  if  we  are  permitted  to  in- 
quire concerning  the  tendency  of  religious  systems,  then  it  is 
manifest  that  Christianity,  in  the  sense  of  the  church  of  the 
fourth  century,  is  nothing  but  a  scheme  of  superstition,  fanati- 
cism, and  spiritual  tyranny  ;  and  that  it  corrupts  the  morals  of 
the  mass  of  men,  not  less  than  it  shocks  the  reason  of  the  few.'  "^ 

Again  he  says  :  "If,  therefore,  when  urged  to  submit  them- 
selves to  the  gospel,  they  are  told  that  what  is  meant,  is  Nicene 
Christianity,  they  must  (if  well  informed  in  church  history)  re- 
gard such  a  proposal  as  involving  the  utter  prostration  of  the 
understanding.  What  then  ?  we  are  to  believe  with  Jerome  — 
with  Ambrose  —  with  Palladius  !  We  are  to  dote  with  Cassian, 
and  are  to  cringe  at  the  feet  of  Basil,  when  required  to  listen 
to  Christ,  to  Paul,  to  Peter."^ 

"  But  suppose  such  an  inference  were  admitted,  what  would 
it  have  to  do  with  the  present  question  concerning  Nicene  church 
principles,  as  revived  by  the  writers  of  the  Tracts  for  the  Times  ? 
This,  namely  —  that  those  principles  embrace  every  element 
of  the  papal  tyranny,  cruelty,  profligacy,  and  spiritual  apostacy, 
and  that  if  left  to  work  themselves  out,  according  to  their  prop- 
er quality,  they  could  have  no  other  issue." 

1)  Ancient  Christianity,  p.  420,  2)  Ibid,  p.  422,  vol.  i. 

vol.  i. 


LECT.  XIII.]     PKELATIC  ATTACK  UPON  THE  RIGHTS  OF  THE  LAITY.      309 

"  It  is  quite  true,  and  we  may  perhaps  live  to  see  it  to  be  so, 
that  devoted  men,  sincerely  embracing  Nicene  church  principles, 
might,  so  long  as  they  formed  a  weaker,  and  a  suffering  party, 
eminently  exemplify  the  temper  described  in  the  sermon  on  the 
mount ;  but  then  it  is  equally  true,  as  we  believe,  that  men 
professing  such  principles,  if  once  seated  in  the  chair  of  power, 
and  holding  an  unchecked  license  to  mould  the  civil  and  eccle- 
siastical constitutions  of  a  country  to  their  will,  could  and 
would  do  nothing  else,  but  establish  a  ghostly  tyranny,  which, 
in  less  than  a  century,  must  place  the  lives,  fortunes,  bodies, 
souls,  of  the  community,  at  the  absolute  disposal  of  a  college 
of  priests,  and  unmarried  priests  ! '" 

Now  that  such  views  and  sentiments,  involving  every  essential 
feature  in  the  Romish  spiritual  despotism,  are  still  cherished  and 
maintained,  and  are  now  boldly  avowed,  by  the  English  prelacy, 
is  a  fact,  which  we  regret  to  say,  is  too  susceptible  of  proof. 

The  doctrine  is  now  insisted  on,  that  the  interference  of  the 
laity  in  the  ecclesiastical  administration  of  the  affairs  of  the 
church,  is  a  gross  violation  of  all  law  canonical  or  divine ;  and 
the  American  branch  of  the  Anglican  hierarchy,  is  loudly  called 
upon  to  rid  herself  of  an  unauthorized  invasion  of  the  aristocratic 
rights  of  the  prelacy,  by  excluding  their  lay  delegates  from  all 
episcopal  conventions. 

Let  the  British  Critic  be  allowed  to  speak  to  "  the  American 
church,"  in  the  name  of  this  prelatic  hierarchy  :« —  "  To  tell  the 
truth,  we  think  one  special  enemy  to  which  the  American  church, 
as  well  as  our  own,  at  present  lies  open,  is  a  refined  and  covert 
socinianism.  Not  that  we  fear  any  invasion  of  that  heresy  within 
her  pale  now,  any  more  than  fifty  years  ago,  but  it  is  difficult  to 
be  in  the  neighborhood  of  icebergs  without  being  chilled,  and 
the  United  States  is,  morally  speaking,  just  in  the  latitude  of  ice 
and  snow.  Here  again,  as  our  remarks  will  directly  show,  we 
mean  nothing  disrespectful  towards  our  transatlantic  relatives. 
We  allude  not  to  their  national  character,  or  to  their  form  of 
government,  but  to  their  employments,  which  we  share  with 
them.     A  trading  country  is  the  habitat  of  socinianism." 

The  work  then  goes  on  to  show  the  dangers  to  be  dreaded 
by  the  prelacy,  from  the  introduction  into  her  communion  of 
commercial  men.  "  They  want  only^  so  much  religion  as  will 
satisfy  their  natural  perception  of  the  propriety  of  being  religious. 
Reason  teaches  them  that  utter  disregard  of  their  Maker  is  un- 
becoming, and  they  determine  to  be  religious,  not  from  love  and 

1)  Ibid,  vol.  i.  p.  426.  3)  Ibid,  p.  323. 

2)  Oct.  1839,  p.  321. 


1310     PRELATIC  ATTACK  UPON  THE  RIGHTS  OF  THE  LAITt.     [LfeGT.  Xlli. 

fear,  but  from  good  sense.  Now  it  would  be  a  miserable  slander 
on  the  American  church  to  say,  that  she  suited  such  a  form  of 
mind  as  this ;  how  can  she,  with  her  deep  doctrines  of  the 
apostolic  commission  and  the  eucharistic  sacrifice ;  but  this  is 
the  very  point;  here  we  see  around  her  the  external  influences 
which  have  a  tendency  to  stifle  her  true  developement,  and  to 
make  her  inconsistent  and  unreal.  If  in  the  English  church  the 
deep  sea  dried  up  more  or  less  in  the  last  century,  why  should 
it  not  in  the  American  also?  Let  the  latter  dread  her  extension 
among  the  opulent  merchants  and  traders  in  towns,  where  her 
success  has  principally  been." 

Another  ground  upon  which  the  Anglican  mother  is  alarmed 
for  the  virtuous  and  established  character  of  her  American 
daughter  is,  that  "  in  the  American  church,  bishops  do  not  as- 
sume sees,  but  are  named  from  their  dioceses.  In  spite  of 
whatever  precedents  may  be  urged  in  favor  of  this  usage,  we 
are  clear  that  it  is  a  piece  o(  puras  jmtas  protestantismiis.  It 
is  diflicult  to  analyze  its  rationale,  but  we  have  no  doubt  about 
the  fact.  The  church  is  in  a  country  not  of  it,  and  takes  her 
seat  in  a  centre.  If  a  bishop  has  no  throne  or  see,  where  is  the 
-one,  0  «f/,  the  never-dying  priest  continual,  who  is  the  living 
apostle  of  the  church  ?  Is  a  bishop  a  mere  generalization 
of  a  diocese,  or  its  foundation  ?  a  name,  or  a  person  ?  Gene- 
ralizations are  every  where,  persons  have  a  position.  Does  a 
bishop  depend  on  his  diocese,  or  his  diocese  on  him?  Mean- 
while, the  Roman  catholics  have  located  their  bishops,  and 
though  their  succession  in  the  country  is  later  than  ours,  they 
have  thus  given  themselves  the  appearance  of  being  the  settlers, 
not  visiters.'" 

The  way  being  thus  prepared,  the  writer  proceeds  boldly  to 
advance  the  following  sentiments  :^ 

"  But  leaving  these  agreeable  instances  of  the  expansion  of  the 
apostolical  idea,  which  show  that  we  have  every  thing  to  hope 
of  the  vVmerican  church,  we  must  go  on  to  allude,  for  our 
space  will  hardly  allow  us  to  do  more,  to  a  much  more  system- 
atic and  overt  deflexion  from  church  principles,  than  any  which 
we  have  yet  mentioned,  —  the  power  usurped  by  the  laity  over 
the  bishop's  jurisdiction,  which,  at  present,  is  an  utter  bar  to  the 
true  developement  of  catholicity.  The  Americans  boast  that 
their  church  is  not,  like  ours,  enslaved  to  the  civil  power  ;  true, 
not  to  the  civil  power,  by  name  and  in  form,  but  to  the  laity ; 
and  in  a  democracy,  what  is  that  but  the  civil  power  in  another 
shape  ?" 

])  Ibid,  p.  326  2)  Ibid,  pp.  237, 329,  330,  332. 


LECT.  XIII.]     PRELATIC  ATTACK  UPON  THE  RIGHTS  OF  THE  LAITY.     311 

"  Again,  as  to  the  third  point,  which  is  the  one  immediately 
before  us,  the  introduction  of  the  laity  into  the  conventions, 
it  is  implied  by  the  venerable  Bishop  White,  in  his  Memoirs  of 
the  American  Church,  that  that  measure  originated  with  him."^ 

"  With  all  due  respect  to  the  memory  of  the  venerable  author 
of  the  pamphlet,  we  must  express  our  strong  feeling  that 
such  views  imply  an  insufficient  appreciation  of  the  clevetope- 
ments  of  the  apostolical  succession.  He  advocated  them  in  a 
pamphlet,  published  without  his  name,  in  1783,  and  the  princi- 
ple of  lay  government  was  carried  by  the  convention.  This 
was  before  the  introduction  of  the  succession  from  England, 
or  Dr.  White's  own  consecration.  The  only  bishop  then 
in  America,  was  Dr.  Seabury  of  Connecticut ;  and  he  and 
his  clergy  strongly,  though  ineffectually,  protested  against  it. 
He  wrote  to  Dr.  Smith,  of  Maryland,  with  his  character- 
istic clearness  and  cogency,  sweeping  away  the  doctrine  of 
expediency,  and  joining  issue  on  the  question  of  historical 
facts.  '  The  rights  of  the  christian  church,'  he  said,  '  arise 
not  from  nature  or  compact,  but  from  the  institution  of  Christ ; 
and  we  ought  not  to  alter  them,  but  to  receive  and  main- 
tain them,  as  the  holy  apostles  left  them.  The  government, 
sacraments,  faith,  and  doctrine,  of  the  church,  are  fixed  and 
settled.  We  have  a  right  to  examine  what  they  are,  but  we 
must  take  them  as  they  are.  If  we  new  model  the  govern- 
ment, why  not  the  sacraments,  creeds,  and  doctrines,  of  the 
church  ?  But  then  it  would  not  be  Christ's  church,  but  our 
church,  and  would  remain  so,  call  it  by  what  name  we  please." 

"Such,"  says  this  work,  "is  the  serviceable  sketch  Mr.  Caswell 
gives  us  of  the  constitution  of  the  American  church  ;  according 
to  which,  it  would  appear,  without  going  to  more  apostolical 
considerations,  that  those  whose  business  or  profession  is  not  re- 
ligious, are,  in  matters  theological  and  ecclesiastical,  put  on  a 
level  w^ith  bishop  and  clergy.  We  are  quite  sure  such  a  con- 
stitution cannot  work  well ;  and  if  any  one  demurs,  then  we 
differ  from  him  what  is  well,  and  what  is  ill.  It  may  throw 
light  upon  its  practical  working,  to  quote  a  passage  from  anoth- 
er part  of  Mr.  Caswell's  work,  which  would  seem  to  show  that 
the  laity,  not  to  say  the  presbytery,  would  have  no  objection  to 
the  same  high  position  in  divine  ministry,  which  they  are  allow- 
ed in  convention." 

Now,  let  analogous  sentiments  to  these  be  avouched  as  neces- 
sary consequences  from   some  political   theory    embraced  by  a 
powerful  party  in  this  country  ; — and  how  soon,  how  universally 
how  unqualifiedly,  would  it  be  reprobated,  as  hostile  to  the  genius 

1)  White's  Memoirs,  p  291. 


312       THE    POWER    TO    SUPPRESS    HERESY    NOW    CLAIMED.    [LECT.  XIII. 

of  American  republicanism  !  And  if  civil  liberty  springs  from 
religious  liberty,  and  never  exists  apart  from  it,  then  why  shall 
we  not  as  decidedly  and  plainly  repudiate  the  introduction  of  a 
system,  which  avowedly  draws  after  it  such  anti-republican  posi- 
tions ?' 

The  claim  to  unlimited  power,  to  be  employed  for  the  sup- 
pression of  heresy,  and  the  compulsion  of  the  refractory,  is  plain- 
ly asserted  in  unequivocal  terms,  and  with  unblushing  effrontery. 
Thus  Mr.  Newman,  in  his  Lectures  on  Romanism  and  Dissent : 
"  If  the  christian  church  was  intended  to  come  on  earth  in  the 
power  and  spirit  of  Christ  himself,  her  Lord  and  defender ;  if  she 
was  to  manifest  him  mystically  before  the  eyes  and  in  the  souls 
of  men,  who  is  on  the  right  hand  of  God  ;  if  her  glory  was  to 
be  like  that  of  heaven,  though  invisible,  her  reign  eternal,  and 
her  kingdom  universal;  if  she  was  destined  to  compel  the  nations 
with  an  irresistible  sway,  smiting  and  withering  them  if  rebellious, 
though  not  with  earthly  weapons,  and  shedding  upon  the  obedi- 
ent, overflowing  peace,  and  the  holiest  and  purest  blessings  ;  it  is 
not  extravagant  to  suppose  that  she  also  was  destined  to  an  au- 
thoritative ministry  of  the  word,  such  as  has  never  been  realized. 
And  that  these  prospects  have  been  disappointed,  may  be  owing, 
as  in  the  case  of  the  Jews,  to  the  misconduct  of  her  members. 
They  may  have  forfeited  for  her,  in  a  measure,  her  original  priv- 
ileges."* 

The  consistency  of  such  arbitrary  power,  and  unlimited  obe- 
dience to  canonical  authority,  on  the  part  of  the  faithful,  is  thus 
made  to  appear : — 

"  It  has  been  argued  by  very  high  authority,  that  the  arbitrary 
strictness  of  military  discipline,  is  not  inconsistent  with  the 
constitution  of  a  free  state,  because  enlistment  is  purely  volun- 
tary. This  argument  applies  with  greater  force  to  the  church- 
man, whose  canonical  yoke  is  freedom  itself,  when  compared 
with  the  bondage  of  the  soldier,  and  who  engages  in  his  profes- 
sion at  a  more  mature  age,  and  with  greater  deliberation. "3 

"  Who  does  not  lament,"  says  Archdeacon  Townsend,*  "  to 
read  in  tiie  pages  o^"  the  learned  author  of  the  History  of  the 
Arians,6  the  defence  of  some  of  the  worst  principles  on  which 
the  church  of  Rome  established  all  its  usurpation  ?  Who  would 
believe,  that  in  the  present  day,  when  the  doctrine  of  toleration 

1)  See  British  Critic,  Oct.  1839,  210,  220.     Bib.  Report,  1837,  pp.  15 

pp.  323.  320,  327,  329,  330,  332.   That  and  17. 
this   exclusion  of  the  laity    was  one  2)   See  at  pp.  241,  242. 

powerful  reason  of  consolidating  the  3)  Brit.    Critic,   April,    1839,    p. 

ancient  popery,  see  affirmed  in  Spirit-  446. 

ual  Desp.  p.  208.     See  also  full  proofs  4)  In  a  charge  to  the  clergy  of 

from   ancient    authors    in  Clarkson's  Allerton,  and  Allertonshire. 
Primitive    Episcopacy,  pp.  189,    197,  5)  Mr.  Newman. 


LECT.  XIII.]         THE   PRELATICAL    SPIRIT   STILL   EXISTS.  313 

might  have  been  supposed  to  have  become  an  axiom  with  gov- 
ernments and  individuals,  that  this  learned  and  laborious  mem- 
ber of  the  University  of  Oxford,  when  he  is  relating  in  very 
just  language,  the  evil  consequences  of  the  conduct  of  the  her- 
etics, who  opposed  in  the  fourth  century,  the  doctrine  of  the 
divinity  of  Christ,  declares,  that  it  is  '  but  equitable  to  antici- 
pate those  consequences  in  the  persons  of  the  heresiarchs,  rather 
than  to  suffer  them  gradually  to  unfold,  and  spread  far  and  wide 
after  their  day,  sapping  the  iaith  of  their  deluded  and  less  guil- 
ty followers.'  That  is,  it  is  better  to  injiict  punishment  upon 
the  persons  of  the  heresiarchs,  than  to  wait  to  confute  their 
opinions,  because  those  opinions  are  injurious.^^ 

Mr.  Townsend  proceeds  :  "  Could  the  church  of  Rome  re- 
quire any  other  defence  of  its  persecutions  ?  Who  would  be- 
lieve, that  in  the  very  same  page  in  which  this  atrocious  sen- 
tence is  uttered,  we  should  read  this  passage  also  ?  '  The 
heresiarch  should  meet  with  no  mercy.  He  assumes  the  office 
of  the  tempter,  and  so  far  as  his  error  goes,  must  be  dealt  with 
by  the  competent  authority,  as  if  he  were  embodied  evil.  To 
spare  him,  is  a  false  and  dangerous  pity.  It  is  to  endanger  the 
souls  of  thousands,  and  it  is  uncharitable  to  himself.'  Could  the 
spirit  of  St.  Dominic  animate  the  inqxdsition  with  more  intol- 
erable language  1  Is  it  to  be  endured  in  the  present  day, 
among  a  people  who  rightly  and  justly  seek  for  liberty  as  well 
as  truth  ...  that  the  episcopal  church  should  be  rendered 
odious  by  such  language  ?  " 

This  same  Mr.  Newman  says,  that  the  "  English  theology 
justifies  absolute  anathemas,  where  the  primitive  church  sanc- 
tions the  use  of  them.'"  Nor  is  this  a  private  opinion,  but  is  in 
accordance  with  the  canons.  Thus,  for  instance,  the  fifth  can- 
on of  the  church  in  Ireland  stands  thus  -.^  "  Whosoever  shall 
separate  themselves  from  the  communion  of  saints,  as  it  is  ap- 
proved by  the  apostles'  rules,  in  the  church  of  Ireland,  and 
combine  themselves  in  a  new  brotherhood,  accounting  the  chris- 
tians who  are  conformable  to  the  doctrine,  government,  rites, 
and  ceremonies  of  the  church  of  Ireland,  to  be  profane  and  un- 
meet for  him  to  join  with  in  christian  profession,  or  shall  affirm 
and  maintain,  that  there  are  within  this  realm,  other  meetings, 
assemblies,  or  congregations,  than  such,  as  by  the  laws  of  this 
land  are  held  and  allowed,  which  may  rightly  challenge  to  them- 
selves the  name  of  true  and  lawful  churches,  let  him  be  excom- 

1)  Lecture  on  Romanism,  p.  261.  2)  See  gloried  in  by  Palmer  on 

For  what  is  meant  by  this  anathema,      the  Church,  vol.  i.  p.  218. 
see  Burnet  on  the  39th  art.  p.  3. 

40 


314  THE   PRELATICAL   SPIRIT    STILL   EXISTS.  [lECT.  XIII. 

municated,  and  nor  restored,  until  he  repent,  and  publicly  re- 
voke his  error." 

So  it  is  with  the  canons  generally.  "  Thus  it  is  evident," 
says  Mr.  Palmer,  "  that  the  Church  of  England  requires  and 
provides  for  unity  and  order  within  all  her  boundaries.  Be- 
sides this,  she  does  not  hesitate  to  denounce  those  who  sepa- 
rate from  her,  as  guilty  —  of  most  grievous  sin.  Her  canons 
pronounce,  that  '  whosoever  shall  hereafter  separate  themselves 
from  the  communion  of  saints,  as  it  is  approved  by  the  apostles' 
rules  in  the  Church  of  England,  and  combine  themselves  togeth- 
er in  a  new  brotherhood,'  accounting  the  Church  of  England 
unfit  to  be  joined  with  in  christian  profession,  shall  be  excom- 
municated, and  not  restored  till  after  their  repentance  and 
public  revocation  of  such  their  wicked  errors.  Those  even, 
who  shall  maintain  such  schismatics,  and  allow  them  the  name 
of  a  christian  church,  are  equally  excommunicated  by  the 
Church  of  England.  Schism  is  condemned  in  every  way.  Its 
authors,  its  maintainers,  its  conventicles,  the  supporters  of  its 
laws,  rules,  and  orders,  are  all  subjected  to  excommunication, 
and  regarded  as  '  wicked.'  Can  any  more  convincing  proof 
be  afforded  that  the  Church  of  England  provides  assiduously  for 
the  maintenance  of  entire  unity  of  communion."' 

Mr.  Palmer  is  equally  anxious  to  show,  that  this  also  is  the 
spirit  of  the  articles. 

"  That  she  does  claim  it,"  he  says,  "  is  shown  by  Towgood 
himself,  who  remarks,  that  although  it  is  said  in  the  twentieth 
article  that  '  the  church  may  not  ordain  any  thing  contrary  to 
God's  word,  nor  so  expound  one  scripture,  as  to  be  repugnant 
to  another,  yet  of  this  repugnance  and  contrariety  the  church 
alone,  you  will  observe,  and  not  every  private  person,  is  al- 
lowed to  be  the  proper  judge,  for  otherwise,  the  article  is  ab- 
surd ;  it  actually  overthrows  itself,  and  takes  away  with  one 
hand,  what  it  gives  with  the  other.'  He  admits,  that  '  it  does 
claim  for  the  church  some  real  authority,'  &c.  Such  are  the 
principles  of  unity  maintained  by  the  British  churches.  They 
may  be  accused  of  severity,  by  those  who  do  not  believe  as  she 
does,  that  salvation  is  olTered  only  in  the  church,  (that  is,  the 
Church  of  England,)  and  that  she  herself  is  decidedly  and  un- 
questionably the  church  of  God  in  these  countries."^ 

"  Each  bishop  is  bound  to  correct  and  punish  such  as  be 
unquiet,  disobedient,  and  criminous,  within  her  diocese."^  The 
agreement  of  the  English  with  the  Romish  church,  on  these 
points,  is  presented  in  evidence  of  her  true  character  and  claims. 

1)  Palmer,  vol.  i.  pp.  218,  219.  3)  Consecration  of  Bishops.  Palm- 

2)  Palmer,  vol.  i.  p.  220.  er,  vol.  i.  p.  218. 


LECT.  XITI.]  PRELATISTS    NOW   CLAIM   CIVIL   POWER,  315 

She  urges  unity  of  communion  "  as  a  matter  of  religious  duty, 
and  inflicts  punishment  on  those  who  offend  against  unity.'" 
These  persecuting  and  intolerant  principles  of  Rome,  "  are  attri- 
butes "  we  are  assured,  "of  the  Oriental  and  British  churches."* 
And  a  "  tribunal  for  the  decision  of  controversies  by  irrefragable 
authority,  has  been,  and  will  be  again  constituted,  whenever  the 
Divine  Head  of  the  church  shall  judge  it  necessary,  for  the  pres- 
ervation of  the  true  faith. "^ 

Until  the  church  can  erect  this  inquisition  in  her  own  name 
and  authority,  "the  right  and  duty  of  the  prince,  to  employ  the 
civil  sword  in  defence  of  the  faith  and  discipline  of  the  catholic 
church,  is  most  fully  admitted,  even  by  those  who  limit  his  au- 
thority in  ecclesiastical  matters,  so  far  as  to  render  him  rather 
the  servant,  than  the  protector  of  the  church."'* 

It  is  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  of  England  at  this  moment, 
that  "  the  king's  majesty  hath  the  same  authority  in  causes 
ecclesiastical  that  christian  emperors  of  the  primitive  church 
possessed  ;  the  denial  of  this  position  involving  excommunica- 
tion, ipso  facto.  The  same  doctrine  is  taught  by  the  thirty- 
seventh  article,  which  declares  that  godly  princes  have  the 
power  to  rule  all  estates  and  degrees  committed  to  their  charge 
by  God,  whether  they  be  ecclesiastical  or  temporal,  and  re- 
strain with  the  civil  sword  the  stubborn  and  evil-doers.  And 
the  law  of  England  most  certainly  recognizes  this  principle, 
since,  by  existing  acts  of  parliament,  temporal  penalties  are 
imposed  on  any  persons  who,  professing  to  be  members  of  the 
church,  either  establish  a  worship  different  from  hers,  or  dare 
to  violate  their  obligation  as  her  ministers  by  teaching  doctrines 
contrary  to  those  which  she  approves.  The  conclusion  which 
I  draw  from  all  these  facts  is,  that  christian  princes,  members 
of  the  true  church,  have  a  right,  and  are  bound  in  duty  when 
necessary,  to  defend  the  faith  and  discipline  of  the  true  church 
existing  in  their  dominions,  by  obliging  its  professing  members 
to  acquiesce  in  the  one,  and  to  submit  to  the  other,  by  means 
of  temporal  powder." 

For  this  doctrine,  the  author  quotes  a  whole  host  of  popish 
and  other  authorities."  He  then  goes  on  to  say,  "  in  fine,  the 
doctrine  and  practice  of  these  catholic  and  apostolic  churches, 
and  of  our  christian  sovereigns  from  the  earliest  ages,  have 
always  been  conformable  to  that  universally  received."* 

It  may  be  well  to  hear  in  some  particulars  the  length  to 
which  this  authority  of  the  magistrate  extends,  —  an  authority, 

1)  Palmer,  vol.  i.  p.  287.  4)  Ibid,  p.  335. 

2)  Ibid,  p.  289.  5)  Palmer,  vol.  ii.  p.  336. 

3)  Ibid,  p.  287.  6)  Ibid,  pp.  337,  338.  32Q. 


316        PRELATICAL  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  CIVIL  MAGISTRATE.    [lECT.  XIII. 

be  it  remembered,  which,  when  not  assumed  by  the  magistrate, 
devolves  upon  the  church.  "  Another  end  of  the  state's  pro- 
tection of  the  church,  is  the  preservation  of  unity  and  subordi- 
nation in  the  church.  Hence  it  is  reasonable  that  the  prince 
should  have  a  right  to  command  superfluous  controversies  to 
cease,  a  power  which  was  abused  by  the  Emperors  Heraclius 
and  Constans,  in  issuing  the  Ectheses  and  Typus  ;  and  which 
the  Emperor  Charles  V.  exercised  at  one  time  during  the 
reformation,  as  Joseph  II.  did  in  the  seventeenth  century,  in 
that  royal  proclamation  which  still  is  printed  at  the  beginning  of 
the  thirty-nine  articles.  Of  course,  the  prince  has  also  a  right 
to  urge  the  prelates  of  the  church  to  suppress  superfluous  con- 
troversies, and  to  give  them  any  temporal  assistance  requisite 
for  the  purpose."^ 

"  Now  it  is  certain  that  the  christian  kings  of  England  have, 
like  other  christian  princes,  the  right  of  protecting  the  church's 
faith  and  discipline,  making  laws  conformable  to  them,  conven- 
ing synods,  presiding  in  them,  confirming  them,  and  obliging  by 
the  civil  sword  all  members  of  the  church,  both  clergy  and 
laity,  to  profess  its  doctrines  and  remain  in  unity  and  subordi- 
nation. This  is  a  power  which  may  most  justly  be  called  gov- 
ernment, and  it  is  this  power  to  which  the  oath  of  supremacy 
refers !  "^ 

"  Even  if  the  throne  were  occupied  by  a  heretic  or  a  schis- 
matic, as  James  the  II.  was,  the  church  might  still  very  justly 
admit  his  ecclesiastical  supremacy,  that  is,  his  right  to  protect 
the  faith  and  discipline  of  the  catholic  church  established 
among  us,  and  to  use  the  civil  sword  to  oblige  all  its  members 
to  unity  and  obedience. "3 

"  It  appears  to  me,  on  the  whole,  that  though  the  only  regular 
and  ordinary  mode  of  removing  a  bishop  is  by  an  ecclesiastical 
judgment,  there  are  particular  cases  in  which  the  temporal 
power  is  justified,  even  without  any  previous  sentence  by  the 
ordinary  ecclesiastical  tribunal,  in  expelling  a  bishop  from  his 
see.  First,  the  right  will  not  be  denied  in  a  case  where  the 
occupant  of  a  see  is  an  usurper  or  intruder,  uncanonically  ap- 
pointed. Secondly,  the  practice  of  the  church  seems  to  favor 
the  opinion,  that  when  a  bishop  is  manifestly  heretical,  when 
he  manifestly  and  obstinately  opposes  the  judgment  of  the 
catholic  church,  when  he  is  manifestly  and  notoriously  guilty  of 
any  crime  which  by  the  law  of  the  catholic  church  involves  his 
degradation,  and  when  there  is  urgent  necessity  for  his  imme- 

1)  Palmer,  vol.  ii.  pp.  342,  343.  3)  Ibid,  p.  347. 

2)  Ibid,  p.  346. 


LECT.  XIII.]    PRELATICAL  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  CIVIL  MAGISTRATE.         317 

diate  removal,  or  difficulty  in  assembling  a  synod ;  then  a  chris- 
tian prince  may  justly  expel  and  drive  him  from  his  see,  by 
temporal  force,  and  procure  the  ordination  of  another  bishop  in 
his  place ! "' 

"  Let  us  first  consider  the  laws  now  existing,  which  establish 
the  discipline  and  doctrine  of  this  catholic  church.  By  the  act 
J  St  Elizabeth,  any  minister  of  the  church  rejecting  the  use  of 
the  book  of  common  prayer,  or  employing  different  forms  and 
ceremonies,  is  liable  to  forfeit  the  yearly  profit  of  his  benefice, 
and  to  be  imprisoned  for  six  months  for  the  first  offence  ;  to 
suffer  imprisonment  for  a  year,  and  to  be  deprived,  ipso  facto, o{ 
his  benefices,  in  case  of  a  second  offence,  and  for  a  third,  to 
suffer  imprisonment  for  life,  besides  losing  his  benefices. "2 

"In  accoi'dance  with  the  principle  involved  in  these  laws,  and 
in  the  articles  and  canons  of  the  Church  of  England,  I  maintain 
firmly,  that  the  state  has  a  right,  when  necessary,  to  oblige 
members  of  the  church,  by  temporal  penalties,  to  submit  to  her 
ordinances,  and  neither  establish  a  different  worship,  nor  teach 
different  doctrines  from  hers.  It  has  a  right  to  prevent  per- 
sons from  separating  from  her  communion,  and  from  troubling 
the  faithful,  sowing  dissension  in  the  community,  and  misleading 
the  ignorant  and  weak-minded  brethren. "» 

Subjection  to  this  authority  of  the  church  is  required,  and  her 
decision  of  all  controversies  to  be  received,  "  whether  she  pro- 
nounce rightly  or  not."  Thus  teaches  Dr.  Pusey,  who  in  his 
letter  to  the  bishop  of  Oxford  says  : 

"  But  the  power  of  'expounding,'  'decreeing,'  'ordaining,' 
implies  that  her  children  are  to  receive  her  expositions,  and  obey 
her  decrees,  and  accept  her  authority,  in  controversies  of  faith  : 
and  the  appeal  lies  not  to  'their  private  judgment;'  they  are 
not  the  arbiters,  whether  she  pronounce  rightly  or  not ;  for  what 
sort  of  decree  or  authority  were  that,  of  which  every  one  were 
first  to  judge,  and  then  if  his  judgment  coincided  with  the  law, 
to  obey  ?  Who  would  not  see  the  absurdity  of  this  in  matters  of 
human  judgment  ?  "* 

So  also  Dr.  Hook,  of  whom  it  is  declared,  that  few  persons 
have  done  more  than  he  has  for  the  church*  —  in  his  Call  to 
Union  —  which  is  the  very  trumpet-blast  of  discord  and  disunion — 
boldly  delivers  himself.  He  quotes  with  approbation  the  following 
standing  rule  of  the  English,  and,  I  believe,  American-English 
church  :  —  "  and  accordingly,  in  legislating  on  this  subject,  the 

1)  Palmer,  vol.  ii.  p.  348.  4)  Letter  to  the  Bishop  of  Ox- 

2)  Ibid,  pp.  363,  364.  ford,  p.  19. 

3)  Ibid,  pp.  364,  365.  5)  Lon.  Quart.  Rev. March,  1840, 

p.  285. 


318  THIS    PRELATICAL    THEORY    EXEMPLIFIED.  [lECT.  XIII. 

Church  of  England  ordains  that  no  one  shall  be  accounted  and 
taken  to  be  a  lawful  bishop,  ])riest,  or  deacon,  among  us,  or  be 
suffered  to  execute  any  of  the  ministerial  functions,  except  he 
be  called,  tried,  examined,  and  admitted  thereunto,  according  to 
our  form  of  episcopal  ordination,  or  hath  had  formerly  episcopal 
consecration  or  ordination."  On  this  he  proceeds  to  remark : 
"Now  this  regulation  very  naturally  offends  the  various  self- 
appointed  ministers  and  teachers,  who  have  of  late  years  abounded 
in  the  land.  They  accuse  the  church  of  intolerance,  bigotry,  and 
ill. berality,  since  they  conclude  that  she  implies,  by  this  regulation, 
the  invalidity  of  all  but  episcopal  ordination :  and  in  this  con- 
clusion they  are  the  rather  confirmed  when  they  find  our  canons, 
denouncing  as  ipso  facto  excommunicated,  not  only  those  who 
affirm  that  the  Church  of  England  is  not  a  true,  and  apostolical 
churchjOr  that  the  form  of  God's  worship  in  the  Church  of  England 
is  corrupt,  but  also  those  who,  not  being  of  the  Church  of  England 
challenge  to  themselves  in  England,  the  name  of  true  and  lawful 
churches.  Under  such  a  reproach  some  of  the  members  of  our 
church  are  impatient,  and  deny  that  the  conclusion  must  of 
necessity  be  drawn.  Others,  rejoicing  in  every  thing  to  bear 
the  scandal  of  the  cross,  admit  the  justness  of  the  conclusion,  but 
contend  that  the  church  is  no  more  to  be  blamed  for  this,  than  a 
mirror  for  the  wrinkles  or  deformities  it  may  bring  to  view."* 

By  virtue  of  this  principle  and  authority  it  is  decided,  and 
by  this  decision  you  will  perceive  its  practical  operation,  "  that  the 
presbyterians  (of  Scotland)  were  innovators.  Their  opinion 
was  erroneous,  but  had  it  merely  extended  to  a  preference  for  the 
presbyterian  form,  it  might  have  been  in  some  degree  tolerated: 
it  would  not  have  cut  them  off  from  the  church  of  Christ:  but 
it  was  the  exaggeration  of  their  opinion  :  their  separation  for 
the  sake  of  this  opinion,  their  actual  rejection  of  the  authority 
and  communion  of  the  existing  successors  of  the  apostles  in 
Scotland,  and  therefore  of  the  universal  church  in  all  ages,  that 
marks  them  out  as  schismatics;  and  all  the  temporal  enactments 
and  powers  of  the  whole  world  would  not  cure  this  fault,  nor 
render  them  a  portion  of  the  church  of  Christ.  With  regard  to 
all  the  other  sects  in  Scotland  which  have  seceded  from  the 
presbyterian  community,  the  same  observations  apply  to  them 
all.  Their  predecessors,  the  presbyterians,  voluntarily  separated 
themselves  from  the  catholic  church  of  Christ,  and  they  in  de- 
parting from  the  presbyterian  communion,  have  not  yet  returned 
to  that  of  the  true  church,  consequently,  they  form  no  part  of 
the  church  of  Christ  ?"3 

1)  "  Call  to  Union,"  p  24.  3)  Palmer  on  the  Church,  vol.  i. 

2)  Ibid,  p.  25.  p.  576. 


LECT.  XIII.]         THIS    INTOLERANT   BIGOTRY    ILLUSTRATED.  319 

"  Such  is  the  awful  sentence  which  is  pronounced  on  those 
Scottish  martyrs,  thousands  of  whom  suffered  on  the  gibbet,  or 
were  butchered  in  the  mass,  by  the  armed  savages  sent  by 
Charles  the  Second  and  his  brother  James  to  dragoon  them  into 
conformity  to  prelacy  !  Of  such  commemoration  are  they  thought 
worthy,  who,  for  conscientious  adherence  to  the  presbyterian 
worship,  endured  torture,  imprisonment,  exile  and  death,  on  a 
scale  worthy  of  the  persecutions  inflicted  on  the  christians,  by 
heathen  Rome ;  and  which  Rome  ecclesiastical  did  not  equal, 
when  the  darkness  in  which  she  had  enveloped  the  Scottish  na- 
tion, was  '  made  visible'  by  the  flames  of  martyrdom,  in  which 
Hamilton,  Mill  and  Wishart  were  consumed  1  These  new  mar- 
tyrs to  conscience,  are  declared  to  be  schismatics ;  and  no  part 
of  the  church  of  Christ.  Such,  also,  is  the  judgment  held  to 
be  due  to  the  two  thousand  English  confessors  of  1662.  Their 
separation  from  the  Church  of  England,  was  founded  not  only  in 
schism,  but  in  heresy,  and  this  being  the  case,  they  could  not 
have  been  any  part  of  the  Church  of  Christ.  The  Guthries, 
Govans  and  Learmonths,  of  Scotland  ;  and  the  Howes,  Bax- 
ters and  Flavels,  of  England  ;  the  Erskines  and  McCries,  who 
belonged  to  christian  bodies,  derived  from  the  church  of  which 
the  former  were  ornaments  ;  and  the  Doddridges  and  Wattses, 
who  have  trodden  in  the  footsteps  of  the  latter — 'no  part  of 
the  church  of  Christ ! ! !  '  It  is  worthy  of  these  sentiments,  that 
what  is  denied  to  those  who  are  termed  '  the  presbyterian  and 
puritan  schismatics,'  should  be  freely  conceded  to  Romanists ; 
and  that  while  '  the  Roman  churches  '  are  declared  still  to  con- 
tinue a  portion  of  the  catholic  church  of  Christ !  the  Puritans, 
and  the  Covenanters,  and  all  who  have  resembled  them,  should 
be  consigned  to  perdition,  as  totally  separated  from  the  church 
of  God."' 

All  who  oppose  this  "  outrageous  bigotry,"  as  it  is  termed  by 
Mr.  Taylor,  which  was  cradled  in  the  despotic  reigns  of  Hen- 
ry VHL,  Elizabeth,  and  Charles  H.,  are  classed  with  "the 
wicked."  Their  errors  are  "  wicked  errors."^  Their  principles, 
"  pushed  to  their  legitimate  consequences,"  terminate  in  "  so- 
cinianism  "*  —  nay,  in  the  licentious  atheism  of  the  socialists, 
which  is,  we  are  told,  their  "  natural  and  necessary  develope- 
ment."^  These  are  the  "  allies  and  supporters  of  Mr.  Owen,"* 
and  constitute  the  mass  of  his  abandoned  and  wretched  follow- 

1)  Schism,  pp.250,  252.  4)  Lond.     Quart.    Rev.    March, 

2)  Palmer,  vol.  i.  p.  218.  1840,  p.  265. 

3)  Dr.  Hook  in  Call  to  Union,  p.  5)  Ibid,  pp.  273,  274,  284. 
44,  says,  even  low-churchmen  should 

be  Socinians. 


320  THIS    THEORY   IRRECONCILABLE   WITH   LIBERTY.      [lECT.  XIII. 

ers.  Such  is  the  character  given  by  a  leading  journal  to  the 
whole  body  of  Enghsh  dissenters  from  the  establishment,  at 
the  present  time,  including  thousands  and  thousands  of  Eng- 
land's best  and  worthiest  inhabitants. 

There  is,  then,  we  affirm,  and  can  be,  no  important  distinc- 
tion between  these  principles  and  those  of  the  Romish  hierarchy.' 
The  powers  here  claimed,  constitute  the  sole  and  exclusive 
prerogative  of  Christ's  royalty.  Their  assumption,  by  any  set 
of  men  whatever,  is  an  invasion  of  His  sovereignty  —  a  most 
wanton  usurpation  of  His  sceptre,  —  and  stamps  their  defenders 
with  the  most  revolting  uncharitableness.  Nor  can  we  think 
that  any  thing  is  wanting  to  such  persons,  but  the  power  —  to 
renew  those  scenes,  which  crimson  the  very  pages  on  which 
they  are  recorded. 

Can  we  be  wrong  in  affirming  that  these  principles,  and  this 
fundamental  doctrine  on  which  they  are  all  based,  are  irrecon- 
cilable with  republicanism,  or  with  civil  and  religious  liberty? 
Do  they  not  lead  their  defenders  to  denounce  the  revolution  of 
1688,  as  a  rebellion  —  and  to  mourn  over  the  deposition  of  po- 
pish James  —  and  the  elevation,  to  the  crown,  of  king  William  — 
as  a  national  sin  —  for  which  England  is  even  now  suffering  the 
just  judgments  of  Heaven. - 

As  it  regards  religious  liberty,  what  can  be  clearer  than  the  en- 
tire opposition  to  it,  of  these  intolerant  principles,  as  they  have 
been  developed  in  this  lecture  ?  By  rendering  salvation  in  a  great 
measure  dependent  on  the  clergy  —  they  thus  tutor  the  minds 
and  consciences  of  their  recipients,  to  a  habit  of  subjection  and 
unquestioning  acquiescence.  By  connecting  the  nature  and  effi- 
cacy of  the  sacraments  with  the  official  sanctity  of  their  adminis- 
trators, rather  than  the  spiritual  character  and  desires  of  the  re- 
cipient—  they  still  further  entangle  the  minds  and  consciences 
of  those,  who  feel  that  salvation  flows  through  the  episcopal  chan- 
nel, which  is  in  the  exclusive  keeping  of  the  clergy.  This  in- 
fluence is  further  greatly  increased  by  surrounding  these  sacra- 
ments with  all  imaginable  mystery  and  awe.  Interposing,  as 
they  do,  a  human  mediation  between  the  soul  and  Christ  —  by  the 
very  laws  of  our  moral  nature  —  the   attention  and  regard  must 

1)  See  this  shown  in  Hanbury's  2)  So  says  Dr.  Pusey  in  his  Let- 
Hooker,  vol.  i.  pp.28,  32.  and  in  Tow-  ter,  p.  182,  Eng.  ed.  See  Miller's  Let- 
good.  See  the  valuable  sermon  of  ter,  pp.  45,73.  See  also  note  D.,  where 
Matthew  Henry,  on  "  Popery  a  Spir-  will  be  found  the  very  valuable  letter 
itual  Tyranny."  Works,  Lon.  1830,  of  the  late  Dr.  Rice  on  "high-church 
p.  619,  &-C.,  where  the  picture  will  be  principles,  opposed  to  the  genius  of 
found  to  bear  a  very  striking  resem-  our  republican  institutions." 
blance  to  the  daughter  of  this  spirit- 
ual molher. 


LECT.  XIII,]    PRELATIC  PRINCIPLES  MTTST  LEAD  TO  INTOLERANCE.       321 

be  withdrawn  from  that  divine  head  and  source  of  spiritual  hfe, 
to  these  human  deputies  or  vicars,  on  whom  dependence  is  made 
immediately  necessary.  By  further  making  the  interpretations 
of  the  church  as  essential  as  the  scriptures  themselves  ;  and  by  re- 
quiring them  to  be  implicitly  received,  this  bondaLje  is  rendered 
still  more  insufferable.'  By  denouncing  the  exercise  of  private 
judgment  as  presumptuous  arrogance,  and  seminal  infidelity,  and 
by  thus  necessitating,  in  every  member,  a  condition  of  doubtful 
anxiety,  which  can  only  be  relieved  by  having  recourse  to  the 
church;  these  galling  chains  of  spiritual  despotism  are  fast  riv- 
eted upon  the  helpless  recipients  of  such  opinions. - 


1)  "  For  it  is  notorious  that  a  cer- 
tain set  of  men,  most  impudently  as- 
suming to  themselves  the  sole  inter- 
pretation of  the  laws  of  this  kingdom, 
and  pretending-  to  an  extraordinary 
zeal  for  the  honor  of  its  Founder,  did 
set  up  and  for  many  ages  maintain  a 
kingdom  of  tlieir  own  over  the  great- 
est part  of  the  christian  world ;  the 
most  impious  and  oppressive  tyranny 
that  ever  exercised  the  patience  of 
God  or  man ;  an  empire  founded  in 
craft  and  supported  by  blood,  rapine, 
breach  of  faith,  and  every  other  en- 
gine of  fraud  and  oppression."  Sir 
Michael  Foster,  Knt.  Exam,  of  the 
Scheme  of  Church  Power,  3d  ed. 
1736.  See  also  Anct.  Christ,  vol.  ii. 
pp.  23,  24,  25,  Eng.  ed. 

2)  Hear  how  this  point  was  argued 
in  ancient  days.  Mr.  Baynes,  in  his 
Diocesan's  Tryall,  (Lond.  1621, 4to.  p. 
73,)  says  :  "  Tliat  which  doth  breed  an 
antichristian  usurpation,  never  was 
of  Chrisfs  institution  But  bishops' 
majority  of  power  in  regard  of  order 
and  jurisdiction,  doth  so  ;  Ergo,  That 
vfhicb  maketh  the  bishop  a  liead,  as 
doth  infiuere  derive  the  power  of  ex 
ternal  government,  to  other  his  assist- 
ants, that  doth  breed  an  antichristian 
usurpation.  But  to  claim  the  v;hole 
power  of  jurisdiction  through  a  dio- 
cesan church,  doth  so  ;  for  he  must 
needs  substitute  helpers  to  him,  be 
cause  it  is  more  than  by  himself  he 
can  perform  But  this  is  it  which 
maketh  antichrist,  he  doth  take  upon 
him  to  be  head  of  the  whole  church, 
from  whom  is  derived  this  power  of 
external  government ;  and  the  bishop 
doth  no  less  in  his  diocesan  church, 
that  which  he  usurpeth  differing  in 
degree  only  and  extension,  not  in 
kind,  from  that  which  the  pope  arro- 
gateth." 

41 


The  learned  author  of"  The  Rights 
of  tiie  Christian  Church,"  (Lond. 
1707,  p.  313,)  with  whose  work 
we  have  lately  met,  through  the  kind- 
ness of  the  Rev.  Shepard  KoUock, 
—  himself  a  member  of  the  Church 
of  England,  and  while  defending  it 
against  the  non-jurors,  sustains  this 
view  : 

"  First,  as  to  the  form  of  government 
itself;  if  the  making  of  laws,  and  the 
executing  of  them,  (without  both 
which  there  can  be  no  government,) 
be  in  the  hands  of  the  same  persons, 
the  bishops,  they  will  lie  under  a 
temptation  to  make  such  as  regard  their 
own  separate  interest  more  than  the 
good  of  the  church  ;  and  having  the 
executive  power,  they  may  abuse  it 
without  the  least  control,  there  being 
no  appeal  from  them,  nor  ran  the  peo- 
ple (which  cannot  happen  in  a  govern- 
ment founded  by  them,)  have  any  right 
to  redress  themselves.  This  being  a 
government  so  tyrannical  in  its  frame 
and  constitution,  can  we  suppose  the 
Divine  Goodness  would  miraculously 
interfere  to  impose  it  on  the  church 
for  ever  ?  The  thing  itself,  without 
any  other  proof,  is  a  sufficient  demon- 
stration of  its  being  a  contrivance  of 
the  ecclesiastics." 

"  The  priesthood,"  says  Bancroft, 
(Hist,  of  United  States,  vol.  ii.  p.  457,) 
"  ordaining  its  own  successors,  ruled 
human  destiny  at  birth,  on  entering 
active  life,  at  marriage,  in  the  hour 
when  frailty  breathed  its  confession, 
in  the  hour  when  faith  aspired  to  com- 
munion with  God,  and  at  death." 

The  prevalence  of  this  belief  in  the 
inseparable  connexion  between  prel- 
acy and  intolerance  is  thus  acknowl- 
edged by  Bishop  White  :  "  In  the 
minds  of  some,  the  idea  of  episcopacy 
will   be  connected  with   that  of  im- 


322  PRELATIC   PRINCIPLES   ANTI-REPUBLICAN.        [LECT.  XIII. 

It  was  one  of  the  loudest  objections  made  to  the  Puritans,  that 
their  system  impHed  "  a  servile  deference  to  a  foreign  ecclesias- 
tical authority.'"  How  powerfully  and  truly  does  this  objection 
lie  against  this  system,  as  far  as  it  exists  among  us,  not  only 
in  its  avowed  character  in  Romanism,  but  also  in  the  increasing 
diffusion  of  these  principles  among  the  clergy  of  the  protestant 
episcopal  church  !  Imbued  with  the  spirit  of  docility  and  rever- 
ence for  authority,  the  minds  of  all  who  submit  to  their  influence, 
are  inclined  to  look  to  the  English  hierarchy  as  the  immediate 
source  of  all  spiritual  power,  and  as  the  great  exemplar  of  all 
perfection.*  We  are  now  to  have  the  Anglo-catholic  church  of 
America,  and  the  Anglo-catholic  clergy,  and  the  Anglo-catholic 
theology  .3 

Should  this  system  extensively  prevail,  we  ask,  therefore, 
what  can  prevent  the  growth,  also,  of  an  Anglo-political  feeling, 
which  may,  in  due  time,  repudiate  a  republicanism  that  has  ever 
been  reprobated,  as  indirect  antagonism  to  prelacy? 

We  have  now,  at  some  length,  examined  the  doctrine  of 
apostolical  succession,  as  it  is  publicly  taught,  and  zealously  de- 
fended, in  this  country.  The  works,  from  which  we  have  drawn 
our  portraiture,  are  authenticated  as  among  "  the  choicest  con- 
tents" of  episcopal  libraries,  and  such  "  as  should  be  in  the 
hands  of  every  clergyman,  and  should  circulate  in  every  parish."* 

We  have  analyzed  the  principles  involved  in  this  system.  We 
have  investigated  its  history,  as  developed  in  its  practical  work- 
ing, and  as  described  by  its  most  candid  observers.  We  have  pas- 
sed from  its  history  in  all  past  time,  and  in  every  country,  where 
it  has  been  established,  to  its  present  exhibition,  by  its  living 
and  ablest  advocates,  in  their  didactic  treatises,  which  ought  to  be 
'*  in  the  hands  of  every  clergyman,  and  circulate  in  every  parish." 
From  all  our  investigations,  conducted  under  circumstances  of 
such  undeniable  fairness  and  impartiality,  but  one  conclusion  can 

moderate  power ;  to  which  it  may  be  jurea  his  church  in  this  broad  conti- 
answered  that  power  becomes  danger-  nent.  Christians  of  the  American 
ous,  not  from  the  precedency  of  one  church,  pray  for  and  defend  your 
man, but  from  his  being  independent."  mother  church,  now  that  the  unholy 
Case  of  the  Episcopal  Churches,  1782,  alliance  of  papist,  infidel  and  dissent- 
p.  18,  by  Bishop  Wlilte.  er,  is  striving  to  overthrow  her,"  (that 
On  the  subject  of  the  practical  ten-  is,  we  suppose,  the  establishment  in 
dency  of  this  system,  as  illustrated  by  England.)  Odenheimer's  Origin  of 
historical  facts,  see  Bishop  Meade's  the  Common  Prayer  Book,  p.  75. 
Sermon  at  the  consecration  of  Bishop  3)  These  terms  are  already  in  use 
Elliott,  appendix,  chap.  xvi.  p.  118,  on  both  sides  of  the  water. 
&c  ;  see  also  Dr  Rice's  Considera-  4)  Bishop  Doane's  Commenda- 
tions on  Religion.  tion  of  the  British  Critic.     See  quoted 

1)  Soame's  Elizabeth.  Rel.  Hist.  at  page  262. 

p.  187.  Palmer's  Treatise  on  the  Church  is 

2)  "Whoever   injures    Christ's      now  republished  under  the  superin- 
catholic  church  across  the  ocean,  in-      tendence  of  Bishop  Whittingham. 


LECT.  XIII.]    THESE    TENDENCIES   NOT    ASLEEP    IN    AMERICA. 


223 


possibly  be  drawn.  That  system  of  church  principles,  which 
is  based  upon  the  doctrine  of  apostolical  succession,  in  its  prac- 
tical working,  is,  and  ever  has  been,  intolerant.' 

It  is,  of  course,  impossible,  in  the  present  state  of  public 
sentiment,  to  carry  into  practical  operation  the  principles  which, 
as  we  have  seen,  are  embedded  in  this  prelatical  system. 
Neither  do  we  believe  any  open  manifestation  of  such  a  spirit, 
would  be  tolerated  by  the  members  of  the  protestant  episcopal 
church.  The  abettors  of  this  system,  in  that  church,  cannot  be, 
relatively  to  other  denominations,  very  numerous.  We  are  not, 
therefore,  to  estimate  its  tendencies,  when  thus  so  partially 
developed,  and  so  kept  under,  by  any  present  or  actual  devel- 
opements.  These,  however,  though  latent,  are  yet  existent. 
They  are  in  the  system,  and  inseparable  from  it.  Nay,  we  do 
find  these  tendencies  actually  manifested,  to  the  full  extent  of 
their  possible  opportunities.  For  the  only  possible  way  in  which 
this  exclusive  and  anathematizing  spirit  could  be  exhibited,  as  it 
is  restrained  from  any  overt  acts,  is  in  words.  And  in  what 
other  way,  than  as  indicative  of  this  temper  of  mind,  can  we 
regard  the  introduction  among  us,  as  current  and  familiar  terms 
of  designation,  of  the  words  dissenter,  schismatic,  and  secta- 
rian :* 


1)  While  bishop  of  Oxford,  Seek- 
er issued  the  following  admonition, 
intended  for  his  brethren  in  Convoca- 
tion, 1761,  p.  19,  (Oratio  Synodalis,  at 
the  end  of  his  Charges,  Wks.)  "  We 
must  always  strive,  not  only  to  re- 
tain the  form,  but  to  renew  the  forge 

of  the  AKCIENT  CHCRCH   GOVERNMENT, 

80  far  as  it  is  propped  up  either  by 

DIVINE    or    HUMAN    AUTHORITY.       And 

till  that  be  done,  our  polity  will  be 
i.AME  and  DEFECTIVE."  "  Now,  what 
was  this  ancient  church  government.-'" 
asks  Mr.  Blackburne,  archdeacon  of 
Cleaveland,  of  Yorkshire,  in  his  Criti- 
cal Commentary  on  his  Grace's  Let- 
ter, (p.  19,)  "  Even  the  model  left  us 
by  some  of  his  Grace's  predecessors 
and  their  adherents,  who  never  want- 
ed props  for  it,  (if  you  would  take 
their  interpretations  of  scripture,) 
either  from  divine  or  human  authority. 
And  the  force  of  it  consisted,  in  put- 
ting a  two-edged  sword  into  the  hands 
of  church  governors,  to  execute  ven- 
geance upon  the  heathen,  and  punish- 
ments upon  the  people."  [See  Psalm 
xlix.  6,  7.  To  which  Archbishop  Laud 
prefixed  this  title  :  "  The  prophet  ex- 
horteth  to  praise  God  for  his  love  to 
the  church ;  eind  for  that  power  which 


he  hath  given  to  the  church,  to  rule 
the  consciences  of  men."]  In  plain 
English,  power  to  correct  heretics, 
schismatics  and  dissenters,  with  the 
wholesome  severities  of  whips,  pillo- 
ries, fines  and  imprisonments." 

2)  See  Dr.  Chapman's  "  Sermons 
to  Presbyterians  of  all  Sects,"  Hart- 
ford, 1836,  paFsim. ;  Dr.  Bowden's 
Letters  on  Episcopacy,  N.  York,  1808, 
vol.  ii.  p.  230,  et  passim. ;  Odenheim- 
er's  Origin  of  the  Prayer  Book,  Phil. 
1841,  p.  46,  &c.  This  writer  teaches 
(see  pp.  81,  106,  and  Note  M.  p  148,) 
that  the  protestant  episcopal  church 
is  "  THE  legitimate  branch  of  the  holy 
catholic  church  in  these  United 
States."  Of  course,  we  and  all  other 
denominations  are  illegitimate  and 
bastard.  It  is  in  perfect  keeping, 
when  this  writer  styles  "  England's 
first  Charles  her  martyred  king,  and 
England's  BEST  FRIEND  AND 
BISHOP,  her  martyred  Laud."  p.  101 

Dr.  How's  Vind.  of  the  Prot.  Ep. 
Ch.  pp.  131,  130. 

The  Rev.  William  Staunton,  in  his 
"  Dictionary  of  the  Church,"  (New- 
York,  1839,  2d  ed.  p.  419,)  defines 
schism  to  be  "  a  separation  from  the 
church  catholic,  but  with  more  im 


324        PRELATISTS    INTRODUCING    INTOLERANT    EPITHETS.    [lECT.  XIII. 

What  are  we  to  understand,  as  American  citizens,  by  these 
words  as  descriptive  of  religious  denonrjinations,  in  this  land  of 
equal  and  impartial  liberty  ?  "  A  dissenter,"  says  Crabbe,  in 
his  work  on  English  synonyrnes,  "  is  one  who  dissents  from  the 
establishment,'"  "  a  schismatic  is  the  author  or  promoter  of 
schism  ; "     and   "  a  sectarian  or  sectary,  is  the  member  of  a 


mediate  allusion  to  it  as  a  breach  of 
unity  with  our  own  branch  of  that 
church;  "  and  a  schismatic,  ■'  one  who 
voluntarily  separates  himself  from  the 
church,  (i  e.  the  episcopal  church,)  or 
is  attached  to  a  schismatical  sect  or 
party."  p.  421. 

See  also  Bishop  Doane's  "  Further 
Postscript  to  his  Examination  of  Rlr. 
Boardman's  Letters,''  Burlington, 
1S41,  pp.  189,  190,  199,  where  he 
seems  to  allude  to  us  schismatists, 
"  and  worse,"  when  he  says,  "  the 
enemy  will  blaspheme." 

See  Dr.  Bowden's  Letters,  first  se- 
ries, N.  York,  ISOd,  vol.  ii.  p.  230. 

See  also  a  recent  sermon  by  the  Rev. 
Thomas  John  Young,  of  John's  Island, 
S.  C,  on  education,  published  by  re- 
quest of  the  clergy  before  whom  it 
was  preached,  (Charleston,  1841,  pp. 
16, 17.)  Thus  the  episcopal  church  is 
uniformly  "the  church."  p.  17. 

So  in  Bishop  Gadsden's  Discourse 
on  tlie  late  Bishop  Bo  wen,  he  speaks 
of  "•  the  protestant  catholic  church," 
(p.  27,)  and  says,  "  our  friend  was  a 
protestant  catholic,"  (p.  47,)  that  is,  "  a 
moderate  high-churchman."  He  also 
speaks  of  sects,  p.  14. 

See  also  "  Christian  Ballads,"  late- 
ly published  by  Mr.  A.  Cleveland 
Co.'c,  pp.  35, 102,  &c.  "The  Genevan 
Schism,  that  is,  the  reformation  on  the 
continent,  '•  purely  brought  in  the  ne- 
ology of  the  continent  of  Europe, 
which  denies  the  Lord  that  bought 
them  ;  "  "  the  presbyterian  congrega- 
tions, the  relics  of  the  puritan  Sc/tism, 
with  only  two  or  three  exceptions, 
deny  the  Lord  that  boug'it  them  ;  and 
the  congregational  Schism  of  New 
England  is  the  father  of  American 
Socinianism  and  the  modern  panthe- 
ism of  Harvard  University."  p.  101. 
"  In  our  own  land,  we  often  find  the 
holiest  and  loveliest  characters  array- 
ed against  what  we  knoio  (his  italics,) 
is  THE  CHURCH,  the  body  of  our  bless- 
ed Lord  and  Saviour  Christ."  ji.  1(38. 
Well  may  this  writer  add,  "  I  confess 
that  for  myself  1  have  a  passion  for 
the  BEAUTY  OF  HOLINESS,   (his  Capi- 


tals,)   as  exemplified    in    the    liturgy 
and  offices  of  the  church."  p.  109. 

In  his  "Christian  Ballads,"  (New 
York,  1840,)  is  one  entitled,  "  But  Re- 
gicides found  Dissent,"  (p.  35,)  which 
he  explains  in  his  Notes  to  mean  "  the 
turbulent  followers  of  Cromwell,  and 
the  murderers  of  King  Charles  and 
Bishop  Laud,"  (p.  102.)  Of  these 
founders  of  dissent,  he  says,  "  Their 
hands  are  red  with  murder,  and  a 
prince's  fall  they  sing.  They  would 
kill  the  Lord  of  Glory,  should  he 
come  again  as  king."  "These  things," 
the  author  adds,  "  are  too  little  known  ; 
and  this  age  is  too  careless  in  allow- 
ing the  deeds  of  its  fathers."  (p. 
102.)  He  thus  politely  apologizes  for 
the  arbitrary  despotism  of  Charles, 
and  the  atrocious  cruelties  of  Laud  : 
"  If  King  Charles  had  some  faults,  so 
had  King  David  ;  yet  withal  David 
was  a  man  after  God's  own  heart, 
and  King  Charles  died  a  blessed  mar- 
tyr If  Laud  had  some  superstitions, 
so  had  Cotton  Mather  ;  and  if  Laud 
had  Prynne's  ears  cropped,  Cotton 
Mather  burnt  witches,"  <fec. 

The  author  of  these  Ballads,  who 
is,  we  understand,  still  quite  a  young 
man,  is  the  son  of  the  Rev.  Dr.  Cox, 
of  Brooklyn.  These  circumstances 
will  be  a  sufficient  excuse  for  leaving 
sentiments  so  utterly  alien  to  charity 
and  to  piety,  without  any  connnent. 
Whether  the  poetry,  from  this  speci- 
men, is  of  a  very  high  order,  will  be 
also  sufficiently  obvious. 

We  will  only  add,  as  a  further  il- 
lustration of  the  intolerant  spirit  of 
prelacy,  as  manifested  in  this  country, 
the  following  : 

Dr.  Hewett  states  that  during  the 
early  ])eriod  of  the  history  of  this 
State,  (Hist,  of  S.  Carolina,  vol.  ii.  p. 
112.)  "That  the  marriages  performed 
by  tlieir  clergymen,  not  being  ordain- 
ed by  a  bishop,  were  unlawful ;  and 
that  the  children  begotten  in  those 
marriages,  could  be  considered  in  law 
in  no  other  light  than  bastards." 
1)  p.  479,  5th  ed.  Lond.  1829. 


LECT.  XIII.]    PRELATISTS    INTRODUCING    INTOLERANT    EPITHETS.        825 

sect."  "  The  schismatic  and  sectarian,"  he  adds,  "  are  con- 
sidered as  such,  with  regard  to  particular  established  bodies  of 
christians "  or  "  to  any  established  body  of  christians  of  any 
country,  but  dissenter  is  a  term  applicable  only  to  the  inhab- 
itants of  Great  Britain,  and  bearing  relation  only  to  the  estab- 
lished Church  of  England."' 

On  what  conceivable  grounds  then,  can  these  reproachful  de- 
signations be  employed  in  this  country,  where  no  such  thing  as 
an  establishment  exists,  —  where,  as  presbyterians,  we  have 
made  no  split  in  any  episcopal  church  whatever,  —  and  where, 
consequently,  we  cannot  be  said  to  adhere  to  any  sect  or  body, 
severed  from  a  parent  communion?  "Words  are  things,"  said 
the  French  philosophers,  when  meditating  the  revolution  ;  and 
when  other  measures  more  coercive  cannot  be  employed,  are 
made  to  express,  ideally,  the  spirit  which,  in  other  circumstances, 
would  manifest  itself  practically.  As  American  christians,  we 
repel  the  insinuations  conveyed  under  these  names,  as  alto- 
gether inappropriate,  absurd,  and  intolerant.  They  belong,  not 
to  our  church,  certainly,  which  in  its  mother,  the  church  of 
Scotland,  never  was  properly  chargeable  with  dissent,  schism, 
or  sectarianism,  towards  the  English  church,  though  she  nobly 
rejected  the  yoke  of  her  intended  despotism.  These  terms  have 
no  meaning  in  their  transplanted  use  ;  or  else  they  signify,  not 
ambiguously,  the  dissatisfaction  of  their  authors  with  the  free 
spirit  of  our  institutions,  which  do  not  even  know  what  it  is  to 
tolerate,  since  there  is  no  proscription.* 

That  system  which  leads  to  the  adoption  of  such  phraseology 
as  this,  in  such  a  country  as  this,  and  as  applied  to  other 
denominations  of  christians  as  fully  recognized  and  protected  as 
itself;  which  repels  all  ministerial  recognition  or  cooperation 
even  in  the  prosecution  of  a  common  good  —  which  arrogantly 
shuts  the  pale  of  Christianity  against  all  beyond  itself —  and 
which  led  even  the  liberal-minded  and  venerated  Bishop  White 
to  disallow  the  burial  of  any  sectary  in  a  consecrated  burial 
ground  —  that  system  which  leads  to  consequences  like  these, 
is  and  must  be  intolerant;  nor  do  we  require  any  thing  more  to 
show  what  would  be  its  developements  under  more  favorable 
circumstances.^ 

Personally,  the  advocates  of  this  system,  and  the  innovating 
authors  of  such  epithets,  may  be  kind  and  amiable,  but  no  dispo- 
sition is  proof  against  the  influences  exerted  by  the  adoption  of 
an  intolerant  creed.*     Against   any  external   coercion,   tests,  or 

1)  P.  480.  4)  Remember  Archbishop  Grin- 

2)  P.  GO,  Lect.  xiii.  dal.     See  Price's  Hist,  of  Prot.  Non- 

3)  See  above.    See  also  Notes  E.  conf.  vol.  i.  p.  296. 
and  F. 


326  THE    EVIDENCE    OF    PRELATIC    INTOLERANCE.       [lECT.  Xlll. 

legislation,  such  individuals  may  be  as  heartily  arrayed  as  any 
others ;  but  let  it  be  remembered,  as  the  martyred  Johnson  told 
Bishop  Sandys,!  that  "persecutors  be  not  all  of  one  sort  —  some 
being  of  the  body,  and  some  being  of  the  mind — some  of  the 
goods,  and  some  of  the  good  name.  As  for  the  good  name  of 
your  brethren,  the  opprobrious  terms  of  you  and  your  colleagues 
in  commission,  as  puritans,  schismatics,  rebels,  and  I  know  not 
what,  doth  sufficiently  testify. "*  Now  if  the  use  of  such  terms 
was  justly  regarded  as  persecution  of  the  good  name  and  charac- 
ter of  the  early  English  nonconformists,  how  much  more  is  it  to 
be  so  regarded,  as  applied  to  the  non-prelatic  communions  in 
these  United  States  ?  And  when  men  allow  themselves  to  use 
such  sectarian,  schismatical,  and  bigoted  terms  —  when  they  en- 
deavor to  fasten  them  upon  other  denominations  for  the  undue 
exaltation  and  pre-eminence  of  their  own  —  when  they  proudly 
scorn  to  recognize  the  ministerial  character  or  church-standing, 
of  such  christian  bodies,  by  any  act  of  christian  brotherhood  or 
courtesy  —  when  they  hold  them  up  as  aliens  from  the  christian 
commonwealth,  and  as  beyond  the  pale  of  Christ's  universal 
church  —  when  they  even  brand  them  when  dead,  as  not  worthy 
to  repose  side  by  side  with  the  remains  of  some  dear  departed 
friend,  who  may,  perchance,  lie  in  consecrated  ground — when 
churchmanship  is  thus  made  to  take  the  place  of  charity,  and 
sectarianism  to  displace  Christianity — surely,  we  have  all  the 
evidence  that,  in  the  present  circumstances  of  our  country,  could 
be  given,  of  the  intolerant  spirit  of  this  prelatic  system.^ 

1)  See  Price's  Hist,  of  Prot  Non-  al  infliction,  yet  by  invading  rights 
conf.  vol.  i.  p.  272.  and  reputations ;  then  the  subject  as- 

2)  "But  now  humbly,"  say  the  sumes  a  diflerent  aspect;  then  the 
persecuted  puritans,  (Price  Hist.  Prot.  system  appears  invested  with  a  most 
Noncont.  vol.  i.  p.  332,  and  see  p.  reprehensible  character,  and  stands 
330,)  "  upon  our  knees,  we  pray  your  most  strongly  condemned  in  its  own 
good  lordships  to  give  us  leave  to  ad-  consequences." 

vertise  you   how   the   adversary  very  "  Non  debent  ecclesice  particulares 

cunningly    hath    christened    us  with  nostra    eetate    id    sibi    arrogare    quod 

an  odious   name,  neither  rightly  ap-  apostolorumseculo  nulla  unquam  ausa 

plied,  nor  surely  rightly  understood."  est  facere.     Non  debent  miiiistri  ec- 

3)  Of  this  tendency  of  this  sys-  clesiarum  id  urgere  quod  ut  fieret 
tem,let  Professor  Powell  of  Oriel  Col-  ipsi  apostoli  numquam  ausi  sunt 
lege,  Oxford,  in  his  recent  work,  persuadere.  Sed  unam  particularem 
Tradition  Unveiled,  bear  witness  :  ecclesiam  renunciare  omnem  frater- 
"  But,"  says  he,  (pp.  52,  57,)  "  when  nam  communionem  alteri  est  res 
I  find  them,  (as  they  consistently  plane  inaudita  et  a  prndentia  et  paxi 
must  do,)  putting  forth  an  exclusive  apostoli  prosus  aliena."  Bishop 
claim  themselves  to  constitute  '  the  Davenant  Adhort.  ad  Pacem  Eccl. 
church,'  assuming  a  lofty  tone  of  su-  Cant.  1G40.  p.  113. 

periority,  and  condemning  as  heretics  "A  bigot,"  says  the  Rev.  Mr. 
those  who  differ  from  them;  affecting  Pratt,  (The  Old  Paths,  p.  231,)  "is 
the  character  of  infallibility,  assum-  one  who  holds  opinions,  for  which  he 
ing  the  seat  of  judgment  over  their  can  assign  no  reason;  or  a  bigot  is 
brethren,  and,  as  far  as  they  have  the  one  who  violently  and  unjustly  con- 
power,  following  out  their  sentence  damns  all  but  his  own  party." 
to  actual  persecution^  if  not  by  person- 


LECT.  XIII.]     WHY   WE    ARE    TO    BE   BRANDED   AS    SCHISMATICS.         327 

It  is  high  time  that  this  encroaching  tendency  should  be  re- 
sisted, not  only  by  all  other  denominations  of  christians,  but  also 
by  the  members  of  the  protestant  episcopal  church  itself.'"  To- 
wards that  church  we  entertain  the  very  kindest  feelings.  Its 
American  constitution  is  based,  as  we  were  of  opinion,  upon  prin- 
ciples of  true  liberty  and  patriotism.  And  although  it  has  re- 
affirmed that  obnoxious  canon,  which  walls  it  round  with  the 
battlements  of  sectarian  exclusiveness  ;^  and  has  retained  some 
things  of  an  objectionable  character  in  its  forms ;  and  although  we 
must  conscientiously  differ  from  it,  on  many  of  the  same  grounds 
which  led  to  the  protestant  nonconformity  of  the  English  Puri- 
tans ;  yet  we  had  not  thought  it  could  manifest  any  affinity  to 
these  principles  of  the  Laudean  school.  And  we  confidently 
hope  we  shall  not  be  found  mistaken  in  this  our  judgment. 

It  is  not  without  good  reason,  we  may  be  assured,  this  title  of 
schismatic  is  to  be  affixed,  if  possible,  upon  us,  by  these  high- 
church  prelatists.  It  is  well  known,  that  it  would  drag  with  it 
all  the  consequences  which  are,  on  prelatic  principles,  involved 
in  the  guilt  of  schism.  It  is  thus  advisedly  applied,  in  the 
knowledge  that,  on  these  grounds,  schism — that  is,  separation 
from  their  church  —  cuts  off  from  the  church  of  Christ, — dissev- 
ers "  from  the  ministers  and  sacraments  of  Christ,"  —  and  from 
the  only  "covenanted  plan  of  salvation  which  has  been  revealed 
to  man."^     Such  are  the  consequences  to  men  spiritually,  which 

.  1)  Dr.  Rice,  in  his  review  of  this,  so  far  from  being  hostile  to  any 
Bishop  Ravenscroft's  Vindication  and  denomination  of  christians,  is  regard- 
Defence,  in  reply  to  the  allegation,  ed  by  the  reviewer  as  one  of  the 
that  he  "  had  attacked  the  episcopal  strongest  proofs  he  can  give  of 
church,  and  attempted  to  excite  odium  friendship  for  that  Christianity  which 
against  her  members,  (Evang.  and  is  common  to  all." 
Lit.  Mag.  vol.  ix.  p.  370,)  replies  ; "  By  2)  See  Canon  xxxv.  of  1808,  and 
no  possibility  can  it  be  shown,  that  he  Canon  i.  of  1829. 

has  done  this  thing,  unless  it  can  be  3)  Daubeny's  Guide  to  the  Ch. 
shown,  that  the  principles  of  the  vol.  i.  pp.  177, 178,179, 249,  &.c.  asre- 
episcopal  church  and  high-church  commended  to  students  by  the  House 
principles  a.Te  identical.  When  con-  of  American  bishops  in  general  con- 
vinced of  this,  he  will  acknowl-  vention.  The  protestant  episcopal 
edge  the  charge.  The  reviewer  then  tract  society  has  now  also,  as  far  as  it 
affirms  constantly,  that  his  assault  can,  pledged  the  episcopal  church  in 
has  been  made  not  on  episcopalians,  this  country  to  the  sentiments  pro- 
but  on  high-church  principles.  He  pounded  by  this  author,  (Mr.  Perce- 
endeavored  to  bring  odium  on  them,  val,)  of  whom  the  Lond.  Chr.  Obs. 
because  he  thinks  them  odious;  to  says,  (for  1837,  p.  840,)  "But  what 
discredit  them,  because  he  believes  we  complain  of  is,  that  he  makes  the 
them  pernicious  both  to  church  and  Church  of  England  to  declare,  that  all 
state.  He  is  conscientiously  their  the  ininisters  of  the  church  of  Scot- 
determined  enemy  ;  and  will,  by  the  land,  and  all  the  protestant  pastors  on 
help  of  God,  to  the  latest  day  of  his  the  continent,  are  not  merely  sectari- 
life,  carry  on  a  warfare  against  them,  ans  or  schismatics,  but  actually  here- 
whatever  name  they  may  assume,  tics;  and  a  heretic  is  a  man  who  is  in 
whatever  guise  they  may  wear.     But  o  danrnublc  error." 


328         WHY    WE   ARE    TO    BE    BRANDED    A3    SCHISMATICS.    [lECT.  XIII, 

flow  from  the  sin  of  schism,  as  laid  down  in  a  standard  work  of 
the  American  episcopal  church,  as  recommended  by  the  House 
of  Bishops.  All  non-prelatic  communions  are  by  this  work 
excluded  from  the  pale  of  Christianity,  and  declared  to  be  alien 
from  the  commonwealth  of  Israel. 

But  there  are  also  consequences  from  this  sin  which  affect 
men  civilly.  For  it  is  taught  us  in  the  same  work,  that 
"schism  and  rebellion  have  in  all  ages  of  the  world  been  inti- 
mately connected  with  each  other.'"  Being  therefore  on  their 
showing  clearly  schismatics,  we  are  to  be  next  involved  in  the 
charge  of  rebellion,  as  "  murmurers  and  complainers,  who  will 
not  submit  to  the  established  government  of  the  land."  And 
thus  is  the  way  made  clear  for  the  conclusion  that,  as  a  sect 
equally  offensive  to  God  and  injurious  to  society,  we  are  not  to 
be  borne.^ 


1)  Ibid,  p.  212,  Disc.  x. 

2)  Tlie  gradual  adaptation  of  the 
style  and  language  of  American  pre- 
latists  to  this  ultimate  condition  of 
aggrandizement,  is  very  discernible 
in  a  recent  publication  isrued  in  New 
York.  (The  Church  of  England  and 
in  America  compared,  1841,  pp.  27, 
32,  34,  and  77.)  "That  these  two 
greatest  and  purest  of  national 
churches  are  now  evidently  approx- 
imating to  each  other,  much  in 
spirit,  somewhat  in  form."  "Now 
in  all  tliis,  both  in  the  feeling  that 
dictates  the  movement,  and  the 
results  to  which  it  leads,  the  Church 
of  England  is,  and  will  be  found  to 
be,  approximating  botii  in  character 
and  organization,  to  what  the  church 
in  America  is;  and  in  the  me;in  time, 
the  latter  is  approaching  her  halfway 
—  not,  we  me;in,  towards  a  legal  es- 
tablishment, God  forbid  !  but  .      .  ." 

"  Where  is  the  federation  that  binds 
Enrrlarid's  bisiiops  into  one,  —  ena- 
bling the  ciiurch  to  move  forward  sys- 
tematically in  its  battle  array  against 
ignorance,  infidelity,  and  vice,  in  the 
land.'  The  answer  is,  nowhere.  An 
episcopal  college  exists  there  but  in 
name,  —  unity  of  action  is  not.  Even 
in  the  fundamental  point  of  terms  of 
admission  to  holy  orders,  each  bishop 
is  left  to  lay  down  his  own  laws,  and 
prescribe  his  own  sine  qua  non.  But 
while  thus  an  '  autocrat,'  in  giving 
the  terms  of  admission  to  the  candi- 
date, he  is  lct"t  inconsistently  power- 
less in  enforcing  them.  Ecclesiastical 
discipline  has,  in   truth,  almost  van- 


ished from  the  English  Church.  '  In- 
guisitiu,'  '  correctio,'  '  depositio,'  areas 
forgotten  terms." 

Again,  as  to  the  privileges  of  the 
laity,  they  are  to  have  all  the  powers 
which  will  remain,  "leaving  catho- 
lic DOCTRINE  and  discipline  in 
EPISCOPAL  HANDS, the  pastoral  charge 
in  clerical  hands,  but  on  all.  other 
points  embodying  the  authority  of  all 
its  members,  personifying  their  will, 
and  carrying  out  their  resolves." 

But  still  further,  on  pp.  32  and  34, 
it  is  said  :  "  It  may  be  well  for  her 
amid  such  perils,  sometimes  to  look 
at  the  safety  of  a  friendly  bark  that 
has  escaped  such  dangers,  by  admit- 
ting no  foreiirn  pilot  to  the  helm  ;  the 
blessing,  we  mean,  that  has  attended 
a  national  church  freely  governed." 
"  This,  then,  is  what  England  now 
wants,  and  what  her  sister  church  in 
America  practically  has,  —  constitu- 
tional forms  of  ecclesiastical  unity,  to 
give  a  practical  centre  to  her  now 
diffused  and  scattered  influences, 
whether  spiritual  or  temporal,  per- 
vading without  encroachment  every 
diocese  and  parish  in  the  kingdom, 
warming  the  hearts  of  churclimen 
with  the  sympathy  of  a  common 
cause,  and  exhibiting  the  church  visi- 
bly and  practically  as  '  the  whole 
congregation  of  faithful  men.'  " 

Once  more,  on  p.  71  :  "  The  lead- 
ing lessons  to  be  learned  on  either 
side  appear  to  us  as  obvious  as  they 
are  clearly  just.  The  American 
churchman  is  to  learn  to  lay  aside 
many     ultra-republican      prejudices, 


LECT.    XIII.]  NO   TOLERATION    FOR    SCHISMATICS.  329 

It  may  be  urged  that,  in  this  country,  it  is  ridiculous  to  talk  of 
the  intolerance  or  persecution  of  one  sect  of  christians  by  another, 
since  ail  are  equally  tolerated.  This  is  very  true  ;  but  then 
preJatists  teach,  that  this  is  "a  liberty,  which  no  human  legisla- 
ture has  any  right  to  grant."  "  No  act  of  any  human  legislature 
can  make  the  sin  of  schism  other  than  it  is."  Thus,  in  the 
work  already  referred  to,*  which,  though  written  by  an  English 
divine,  is  among  the  books  recommended  by  the  House  of 
American  bishops"  for  the  use  of  American  students,  it  is  said, 
"  Wherever,  then,  the  church  of  Christ  exists,  an  obligation  to 
communion  with  it  is  binding  upon  the  conscience  of  every 
christian,  by  virtue  of  that  divine  law  which  accompanied  its 
establishment.  This  divine  law  is  paramount  to  every  human 
injunction  upon  the  subject.  Whatever  liberty,  therefore,  the 
act  of  toleration  may  be  supposed  to  give,  with  respect  to  chris- 
tian conformity,  must  be  understood  as  given  in  a  case  in  which 
NO  HUMAN  LEGISLATURE  has  ANY  LIBERTY  to  grant.  The  civil 
penalties  which  were  designed  to  secure  it  having  been  removed, 
the  law  to  which  they  are  annexed  is  left  to  stand  upon  the 
original  ground  of  its  supposed  agreement  with  the  revealed  will 
of  God ;  consequently,  the  obligation  to  church  unity  is  just 
what  it  was  in  the  primitive  days  of  the  church,  before  civil 
policy  interfered  with  the  business."  "  The  sin  of  schism,  there- 
fore, or  a  wilful  separation  from  the  church  of  Christ,  is  just 
what  the  word  of  God  has  pronounced  it  to  be,  whatever  may 
be  the  determination  of  the  magistrate  upon  the  subject." 

Such  are  the  necessary  deductions  from  this  prelatic  system, 
as  drawn  even  by  themselves.^  No  other  communions,  separate 
from  the  prelacy,  are  tolerable,  according  to  the  divine  law;  and 
although,  when  under  authority  and  constraint,  the  church  must 
submit  to   such  an  unchristian  toleration,  she  is  yet  bound   to 

when  lookinof  at  the  Church  of  Eng-  Immediately  after  the  close  of  the 

land  ;  to  discfiminate  in  it  between  the  revolutionary     war,    a    petition    was 

church  as   voluntarily  endowed,  and  presented  to  the  legislature  of  Mary- 

the  church  as  by  law  established, con-  land,  signed  by    Dr.    William   Smith, 

founding  the   two  neither  in  their  or-  (Provost    of  the  College  in    Philad.) 

ictin  nor  their  results,  nor  the  feelings  and   Thomas    Gates,  to    connect   the 

with  which  he  regards  them.     Nor  is  episcopal  church  with  the  state.     See 

this  all.     He   is  to  recognize  further,  given  at  length  in  letters  addressed 

in  its  alliance  of  church  witli  state,  a  to  the  editor  of"  A  CoUei'tion  of  the 

moral  and  christian  bond,  as  well  as  a  Essays  on  the  subject  of  Episcopacy," 

legal  and  arbitrary  one,  and  take  care  «fcc.,  by  the  author   of  Miscellanies, 

lest  his  well-founded  objection  to  the  Albany,     M  ly,     I80G,    pp.     3J,    32/ 

one  lead  him  to   undervalue  the  ines-  Sprague's  Coll.  vol   410. 

timable  national    blessings  that  flow  1)  Vol.  i.  pp.   140,  141,  ed.  2nd. 

from  the   other,  and  of  which   chris-  Lond.  18U4. 

tian  England,  with  all  its  drawbacks,  2)  See  Canons,  &c.  of  the  Prot. 

is  the  noblest  specimen  that  the  world  Ep.  Ch.  N.  Y.  1829,  p.  53.    Signed  by 

can  offer."  Bishop  White. 

42 


330      SUCH  IS  THE  EXISTING  CHARACTER  OF  THE  PRELACY.  [LECT.  XIIT. 


protest  against  it  as  unrighteous,  and  by  her  spiritual  anathemas 
to  assert  her  exckisive  right  to  be  tolerated  as  the  alone  church 
of  Jesus  Christ. 

It  may  indeed  be  replied,  that  a  charge  of  intolerance  equally 
well  founded  may  be  made  against  the  presbyterians  in  England, 
Scotland,  and  New  England  also,  in  ages  that  are  past.  To 
say  nothing,  at  present,  of  the  plain  and  palpable  distinction  to 
be  made  between  the  intolerance  which  we  may  confess  to  have 
been  thus  exercised,'  and  that  perpetuated  and  systematic  ex- 
ercise of  it,  under  the  Romish  and  prelatic  systems  —  we  would 
seriously  recall  the  objector  to  a  fair  estimate  of  our  ecclesiastical 
system  as  it  now  exists. 

We  are  willing  that  this  prelatic  doctrine  should  be  tested  by 
its  present  tendencies,  and  not  by  its  past  dehnquencies  ;  and 
furtlier,  that  those  tendencies  should  be  measured  by  the  exhi- 
bitions which  are  now  made  of  the  system,  by  its  ablest  and 
most  recent  defenders.  It  is  not  the  prelacy  of  past  ages,  but 
of  this  present  time,  of  which  we  speak.  It  is  not  for  the 
sentiments  of  Parker,  or  Whitgift,  or  Laud,  of  persecuting  and 
notorious  memory,  we  would  pass  on  it  a  sentence  of  condem- 
nation ;  except,  indeed,  so  far  as  their  arbitrary  opinions  have 
been  re-adopted  and  sanctioned  at  the  present  time.  But  it  is 
for  the  declarations,  deliberately  and  didactically  exhibited  in 
the  writings  of  existing  divines  ;  we  have  been  led  to  reprobate 
the  intolerant  and  persecuting  tendencies  of  the  system,  of 
which  the  prelatic  doctrine  of  apostolical  succession  is  the 
"  ethical  principle."^ 


1)  See  Bancroft's  Hist,  of  the 
United  States,  vol  i.  cli.  ]0.  "  When, 
therefijre,  the  severities,  exercised  by 
the  Church  of  Enirland,  (say  the  pu- 
ritans, &c.)  are  referred  to,"  says  Dr. 
Hdvv,  (Vind.  pp.  477,  481,)  we  must 
always  "rci-ollect  that  toleration  was 
not  at  that  time  understood  or  practised 
by  any  denomination  of  christians." 

"  Dr.  Holmes,  in  his  '  American 
Annals,'  offers,  as  an  excuse  for  tJie 
cruelties  inflicted  upon  the  quakersin 
Mew  Engliind,  '  the  prevalent  o|)in- 
ion,  among  all  sects  of  christians  at 
Ihiit  day,  that  toleration  is  sinful.' 
And  this,  indeed,  is  the  true  pallia- 
tion. Is  it  not,  then,  most  unjust 
and  ungenerous,  to  dwell  upon  tlie 
severities  exerci-sed  by  the  Church  of 
England  in  Europe  <ir  this  country." 

2)  "  During  many  ages,"  says 
Dr.  Rice,  (Relig.  &  Lit.  Mag.  vol.  ix. 
p  300.)  "  and  in  many  parts  of  the 
world,  it  has  been  held,  that  the  church 


possesses  authority  to  compel  men  to 
receive  her  doctrines,  and  submit  to 
her  disciphne.  Tliis  pretension  grows 
naturally  out  of  tliat  transltM-  of  pow- 
er, which  it  has  been  maintained  iliat  • 
Jesus  Clirist  made  to  his  church.  All 
power  in  heaven  and  earth  is  given  to 
him  ;  he  tells  his  np  islles  '  as  the 
Father  hath  .'ient  me,  so  send  1  you.' 
The  pope  is  the  successor  of  St.  Pe- 
ter ;  or,  the  bishops  are  successors  of 
the  apostles,  and  as  heads  of  the 
church,  are  depositaries  of  tliat  au- 
thority, which  Christ  gave  to  these 
first  preaciiers  of  the  gospel.  Rea- 
soning of  this  sort  convinced  the 
bishops,  that  their  authority  was  right- 
ful. And  when  even  good  men  are 
convinced  of  tliis,  and  have  power  to 
enforce  their  claims,  tliey  are  strong- 
ly tempted  to  tyrannize  ov>'r  con- 
science. Much  more  is  this  the  case 
with  the  ambitious  and  worldly-mind- 
ed, whom  a  love  of  wealth  and  influ- 


LECT.  XIII.]  PRESBYTERIANS  NOT  CHARGEABLE  WITH  THIS  SPIRIT.    331 

We  heartily  join  in  the  unsparing  reprehension  of  what- 
ever acts  of  cruelly  and  intolerance  our  ancestors  may  have, 
ignorantly,  committed.  We  utterly  repudiate  the  principles 
from  which  such  a  mistaken  and  unchristian  policy  took  its  rise. 
And  we  disown,  as  a  true-hearted  member  of  our  church,  any 
wlio  may  sanction  such  principles  at  the  present  day.  But  are 
they,  we  boldly  ask,  to  be  found  in  our  standards?  Are  they 
maintained  by  our  divines,  as  existing  in  those  standards  ?  Or 
do  we,  in  our  conduct  towards  other  denominations,  give  mani- 
festation of  the  existence  of  such  latent  sentiments,  within  our 
bosoms  ?  By  our  own  words  —  by  our  sentiments,  and  by  our 
conduct,  let  us  be  adjudged  ;  and  by  these,  let  our  acquittal 
from  such  an  imputation  be,  in  all  fairness,  honorably  declared. 
But  to  this  subject  w^e  will  have  occasion  to  recur,  when  we 
come  to  speak  of  the  true  liberality  and  republicanism  of  pres- 
byterianism. 

ence  induce  to  seek  hio-h  places  in  the  the  God  of  mercy,  of  the  most  holy 
churcii.  Hence  oria^inated  «c^so/"?/»,i-  and  ever-blessed  trinity,  acts  of  eru- 
forviity,  h/irh-roinmission.  and  star-  elty  have  been  perpetrated  without 
cliamhir  couits  ;  the  inqvigUi-n.  with  number,  of  vvhicli  fanatical  and  bloody- 
all  its  infernal  apparatus  ;  the  stake  minded  heathens  might  well  be  asham» 
and  the  wheel,  as  inslrumenls  of  con-  ed." 
version.     Hence,  too,  in  the  name  of 


ADDITIONAL  NOTES  TO   LECTURE   THIRTEENTH. 


NOTE  A. 

Dr.  Bangs  in  his  Original  Church  of  Christ,  (N.York,  1837.  ed.  2d,  pp.  201, 
202,)  tiius  speaks  of  this  doctrine  :  "  The  succession  therefore  is  void.  It  is 
indeed  '  a  'able  '  of  man's  invention.  1  fearlessly  pronounce  it  snch,  and  chal- 
lenge the  proof  of  its  reality.  But  to  sweep  tliis  cobweb  from  the  shelf  of  eccle- 
siastical libraries,  where  it  has  lain  as  an  entangler  for  the  flies  of  clerical 
upstarts,  I  will  refer  the  reader  to  the  facts  distinctly  stated  in  my  previous 
numbers,  which  prove  that  presbyters  did  claim  and  exercise  the  power  of 
ordination  for  more  than  300  years,  and  in  the  Scotch  cliurch  till  the  year  430. 

"  7'his  being  the  fact,  it  undeniably  follows,  that  whenever  the  exclusive  right 
of  ordination  was  claimed  —  1  do  not  say  exercised,  merely  —  by  a  third  order  as 
distinct  from,  and  superior  to,  presbyters,  it  was  an  usukpation,  and  hence  it 
follows  that  those  who  perpetuate  this  claim  to  the  exclusion  of  all  others,  are 
upholders  of  an  ancient  usurpation  over  tlie  rights  and  liberties  of  the  ■preshijlers. 
This  remark  does  not  apply  lo  those  presbyters  who,  for  good  and  justifiable 
reasons,  voluntarily  relinquished  their  rights  of  order  and  jurisdiction.  But  L 
repeat,  that  thosewho  set  up  this  exclusive  claim,  tis  an  indispensable  pre-rrquisile 
to  a  valid  ordination,  have  usurped  powers  which  did  not  belong  to  them,  and 
that  those  who  plead  for  its  continuance  in  a  third  order,  are  justifie'-s  of  this 
same  usurpation  in  defence  of  scriptural  authority  and  apostolic  usage." 


NOTE  B. 

"  I  KNOW  no  way,"  says  an  old  writer,  "  to  judge  of  futurity,  but  by  compar- 
ing it  with  things  similar  that  are  past. 

"  Now,  sir,  on  a  review,  as  far  as  I  recollect  the  history  of  England,  to  say 
nothing  of  the  extravagant  encroachment  ol'  the  calholic  bishops,  who  became 
so  intolerable  as  to  weary  out  tlie  nation,  and  prt'pare  in  some  measuie  for  a 
protestant  reformation  :  1  Siiy,  not  to  mention  these,  have  not  the  English  bish- 
ops encroached  more  and  more  on  the  temporal  and  spiritual  liberties  of  the 
nation,  (ill  they  were  at  last  the  cause  of  beheading  their  king,  and  overthrow- 
ing the  government.''  —  Were  they  not  always  a  public  grievance,  by  abetting 
popery,  ret:iining  many  superstitious  rights  and  customs  in  their  worship  and 
government;  introducing  novelties  in  the  church,  making  nearer  approaches 
to  the  church  of  Rmne,  to  the  great  otlence  of  the  pmtestant  churches  of 
Germany,  Fiance.  Scotland,  and  Holland  .'  —  Have  not  those  prelates  embroil- 
ed the  British  island,  and  made  the  dissensions  between  the  two  nations 
of  England  and  Scotland.'' — Who  can  avoid  charging  them  with  all  the  civil 
wars  between  the  king  and  parliament? 

"  Can  it  lip  denied  they  hiive  been  the  instruments  of  displacing  the  most 
godly  and  conscientious  cleroy  ;  of  vexing,  ))iinishing,  and  banisliing  out  of 
the  kingdom,  the  most  religious  of  all  conditions,  who  could  not  in  conscience 
comply  with  their  superstitious  inventions  and  ceremonies  .'  —  By  such  refu- 
gees, who  fled  from  the  persecutions  of  the  imperious  Archbishop  Laud,  were 
Boston,  Rhode  Island,  &.c.,  first  planted. 


NOTES    TO    LECTURE    XIII.  33S 

"  Have  they  not  tried  to  bind  the  nation  to  themselves  in  perpetual  slavery  by 
their  canons,  &c.  ?  — Did  they  not  often  invade  the  civil  liberty,  by  preaching 
passive  obedience,  and  non-resistance,  and  declaring  for  arbitrary  power, 
encouraging  illegal  projects  to  raise  money  williout  parliament?  —  So  glaring 
their  conduct,  that  even  their  friends  could  say  little  for  them.  Lord  P'alkland 
in  a  parliamentary  speed)  for  them  is  obliged  to  own,  '  While  mass  has  been 
said  m  security,  a  conventicle  has  been  a  crime,  and  which  is  yet  more,  the 
conforming  to  ceremonies  has  been  more  exacted  tlian  conforming  to  Chris- 
tianity ;  and  while  men  for  scruples  have  been  undone,  for  attempts  of  sodomy, 
they  have  only  been  admonished.' 

"  Obj. :  '  But  why  reason  from  the  abuse,  against  the  use  .'  Many  excellent 
persons  of  that  order,  have  been  an  ornament  to  the  nation.' 

"  .^ns. :  Doubtless  there  have  in  all  ages,  been  very  great,  learned,  pious  and 
candid  divines  of  that  order,  who.^e  names  with  peculiar  fragrance  are  trans- 
mitted to  posterity  ;  nay,  some  few  have  appeared  on  the  side  of  liberty  in 
opposition  to  popery  and  arbitrary  powers,  particularly  the  renowned  seven  in 
the  reign  of  James  II.  who  were  delivered  with  the  highest  applause  from  the 
tower.  —  But  surely  tlie  most  worthy  prelates  could  not  deny,  that  what  I  have 
said  is  true  of  the  greater  part  of  that  order.  Their  power  intoxicates,  and 
leads  to  these  dangerous  measures. 

"  I  shall  not  now  take  time  to  lead  you  to  different  nations.  —  I  would  only 
request  you  to  view  the  effects  of  introducing  bishops  witiiout  the  consent  of 
the  people  in  Scotland.  —  Please,  sir,  to  read  the  Memoirs  of  that  Church,  the 
Cloud  of  Witnesses,  Robinson's  celebrated  History,  Bishop  Burnet's  and  Croek- 
shank's,  &c  —  Consider  the  diike  of  Lauderdale's,  or  the  duke  of  York's  con- 
duct there.  —  Beiiold  tlie  blood  of  thousands,  of  the  most  valuable  persons  of 
the  kingdom,  inhumanly  shed  !  Besides  the  many  thousands  banished,  impris- 
oned and  reduced  to  beggary  :  all  occasioned  by  imposing  bishops  and  their 
superstitions  on  the  nation,  contrary  to  their  consciences,  and  many  of  these 
mischiefs  happened  after  the  restoration,  when  the  nation  enjoyed  peace 
abroad. 

"  Ohj. :  But  perhaps  you  will  say, '  What  attempts  since  the  revolution  have 
bishops  made  on  the  liberties  of  the  people  .'  ' 

"  jS«s.  :  The  reason,  sir,  is  abundantly  evident.  We  thank  God  they  have 
not  Ind  so  much  power.  Their  convocation,  formerly  the  highest  ecclesiastic 
court  in  the  nation,  since  the  glorious  William  HI.  has  not,  that  I  have  found, 
been  permitted  to  act  any  thing,  though  they  meet  for  the  sake  of  form.  You 
think  it  hard  to  be  deprived  of  the  privileges  of  other  societies  ;  but  you  may 
blame  the  arbitrary  spirit  of  your  bishops,  who  have  always  infringed  on  ihe 
estates  and  consciences  of  the  people. 

"  Thai  they  are  not  to  he  tiusted  yet  with  our  liberties,  may  be  inferred  from 
their  treatment  of  the  '  Free  and  Candid  Disquisitions,'  a  book  drawn  up  by 
most  dutiful  sons  of  the  Church  of  England,  about  twenty  years  ago,  yet  it 
could  not  be  noticed  by  your  bishops  ;  though  they  proposed  in  the  most  hum- 
ble and  modest  manner,  a  review  and  emendation  of  the  almost  innumerable 
errors  and  blunders,  in  your  liturgy,  matins,  Athanasian  creed,  catechism, 
collects,  prayer  and  supplicatory  offices,  rubrics,  calendar,  canons,  homilies, 
oaths  of  churchwardens,  ecclesiastic  courts,  pluralities,  and  non-residence,  «&c. 
and  cftered  the  authority  of  the  greatest  and  best  writers  of  the  church.  But 
bishops  aie  bishops  still. 

"  That  we  dare  not  yet  trust  bishops  with  our  liberties  :  only  recollect,  sir,  a 
recent  specimen,  the  repeal  of  the  stamp  act;  when  the  bulk  of  the  nation  saw 
it  would  ruin  Britain  and  her  colonie.'^  too,  these  reverend  fathers  in  God, 
almost  all  insisted  on  the  illegal  oppression." 

See  the  tyrannous  conduct  of  the  prelacy  in  Scotland  exhibited  at  length, 
in  the  Altare  Uamascenum  Davidis  Calderwood,  pp.  775  —  782. 

"  Some  may  say,"  says  Mr.  Jameson,  a  very  old  and  able  writer  on  this  sub- 
ject, "  that  the  question  is  not  of  great  moment.  I  affirm  the  contrary,  were  it 
but  on  this  account  only,  that  all  the  bloodshed,  rapine,  confiscation,  banish- 
ment, imprisonment,  fining  and  confining,  that  miserable  Scotland  has  been 
harassed  with  above  one  hundred  years,  were  occasioned  by  this  controversy. 
It  gave  rise  to  all  the  mischief,  butchery,  hardship,  and  other  pieces  of  most 


334  NOTES    TO    LECTURE    XIII. 

barbarous  cruelty,  that  during  all  tliese  years  has  been  perpetrated."  Sum  of 
the  Episcopal  Controversy,  Giasg.  1713,  &-i:.  Pref.  in  l.'ie  Old  South  Ch.  Lib. 
It  is  customary  for  prelatists  to  talk  of  the  sufferings  of  presliyterians  as 
imaginary.  "  O,  sir,"  say  ths  authors  of  a  recent  "Plea  for  Presbytery,"  in 
vindication  of  the  church,  (Plea  for  Presbytery,  p.  301.)  "you  know  not  the 
feelings  of  indignation  that  your  words  excite  in  many  a  heart.  The  sufferings 
of  presbyterians  all  fancy  and  imagination  !  No,  sir,  they  were  stern  realities. 
The  deeds  of  atrocity  and  blood  ])erpetrated  by  the  Church  of  England  will 
slain  her  name  until  history  be  silent.  Look  to  Scotland.  No  less  than  lioen- 
ty-two  thousand  Scottish  presbyterians  were,  in  thirty  years,  sacrificed  to  the 
demon  of  prelacy.  Look  to  Ireland.  Since  first  ])resbylery  was  planted  incur 
island,  it  has  been  the  object  of  unrelenting  persecution.  Often  has  our  church 
been  <h-ipping  with  blood,  but  that  blood  has  been  her  own  Often  she  has 
been  the  sufferer,  but  never  the  pcisccutor."  Plea  for  Presbytery,  pp.  29'J,  301, 
number  of  Presb.  victims,  examples,  p.  371,  &c.  &.c. 


NOTE  C. 

To  those  who  are  skeptical  as  to  the  alleged  tendency  of  this  system  to 
intolerant  and  arbitrary  measures,  I  would  recommend  an  examination  of  the 
various  pamphlets  issued  during  the  controversy  occasioned  by  the  election  of 
an  assistant  bisiiop  to  Bishop  White,  and  which  are  preserved  in  the  Loganian 
library  in  Philadelphia.     (Pamphlets  No.  1^07,  &c.) 

See  also  the  letter  to  Bishop  Plobnrt,  by  the  Rev.  Benjamin  Allen,  rector  of 
St.  Paul's  church,  Philadelphia.  (Philad  18'27.)  The  author  thus  speaks  :  — 
"  In  the  year  1807,  you  were  desirous  of  i)reventing  the  settlement  of' a  partic- 
ular clergyman  in  St.  Ann's  church,  Brooklyn.  That  clergyman  (the  Rev. 
H.  J.  Feltus)  had  dared  to  differ  from  you.  What  were  the  means  you  made 
use  of  in  order  to  prevent  his  settlement.?  The  statement  of  that  gentleman, 
corroborated  by  such  men  as  George  Warner,  &c.  is  that  you  charged  him 
■with  the  horrible  crime  of  forgery.  (See  the  whole  statements,  given  in  the 
Appendix.)  Your  charge  was  groundless,  and  your  end  in  making  it  was  not 
attained.  In  the  year  1811,  the  Rev.  Mr.  Jones  published  a  pamphlet 
detailing  a  series  of  oppositions  and  persecutions  experienced  at  your  hands, 
because,  as  he  states,  he  would  not  be  subservient  to  your  wishes.  The  Rev. 
Mr.  Jones  has  remained  in  comparative  obscurity  to  this  hour. 

"  The  Rev.  Dr.  Uucachet  was  so  opposed  by  you,  when  seeking  holy  orders, 
that  he  was  obliged  to  obtain  those  orders  through  the  medium  of  another 
bishop,  and  the  Rev.  Bishop  Griswold,  for  daring  to  ordain  him,  was  subjected 
your  severe  animadversion."  pp.  3,  4. 

The  author  then  goes  on  to  describe  the  series  of  measures  taken  by  Bishop 
Hobart,  to  destroy  the  plans  of  Bishop  Chase,  both  in  this  country  and  in  Eng- 
land, because  "  he  refused  to  make  his  seminary  the  satellite  of  New  York." 
"  Did  you  not  "  he  asks  Bishop  H.  "  while  in  England,  circulate  handbills  and 
pamphlets  against  him,"  &c. 

The  writer  further  illustrates  this  point  by  the  fact,  that  without  and  beyond 
any  constitutional  authority,  "  the  bishop  of  the  diocese  so  altered  some  of 
these  (parochial)  reports,  that  their  writers  were  unwilling  to  acknowledge 
them  as  their  own,  and  declared  them  essentially  changed  in  character."    p.  11. 

"  In  my  inmost  soul  I  do  honestly  believe  you  (Bishop  Hobart)  to  be  the 
worst  enemy  of  the  liturgy,  the  greatest  opponent  to  the  spread  of  episcopacy, 
and  the  certain  author  of  entire  ruin  to  our  church,  if  your  policy  prevail.  In 
every  portion  of  the  United  States  I  have  seen  and  heard  discontent,  and  dis- 
satisfaction concerning  you.  You  are  entitled  '  the  Talleyrand,'  the  would-be 
archbishop,  and  every  other  name  which  can  indicate  the  existence  of  a  feeling 
which  regards  3'ou  as  ambitimis,  im])erious,  intermeddling,  and  determined  to 
attain  power.  Hardly  a  diocese  is  there  that  does  not  expect  it  must  ask  your 
permission  as  to  who  shall  be  its  bishop  ;  scarce  a  religious  institution  but 
beholds  you  with  dread."     (p.  30.) 

"  I  repeat,"  says  the  Rev.  Benjamin  Allen,  rector  of  St.  Paul's,  Philadel- 
phia, in  his  letter  to  Bishop  Hobart,  (Philad.  1827,  p.  33.)  "  you  are  unarmed 


NOTES    TO    LECTURE    XIII.  335 

by  the  civil  power  ;  are  not  your  notions,  however,  dangerous  ?  Because  our 
ears  are  safe,  and  you  cannot  touch  any  tiling  viore  than  our  characters,  are 
we  therefore  to  be^content  ?  "     (His  italics  and  capitals.) 

See  also  Dr.  Hobart's  System,  exemplified  in  the  Lite  proceedings  against 
his  colleague,  by  the  Rev.  Cave  Jones,  A.  M.  New  York,  1811.  Also,  "  A 
Solemn  Appeal  to  the  Church,  being  a  Plain  Statement  of  Facts,"  &c.  by  Rev. 
Cave  Jones,  N.  Y.  1811.  Spraguc's  Coll.  vol.420,p.  101,  &c.  Also,'- A  Declar- 
ation and  Protest  of  the  Wardens  and  Vestry  of  Christ's  Church,  Cincinnati, 
against  the  proceedings  of  Hishop  IJobart."     Cincinnati,  IH23. 

As  an  additional  illustration,  see  the  account  of  the  treatment  of  the  Rev. 
Mr.  now  Bishop  Mcllviiine,  as  given  in  the  appendix  to  the  "  Review  of  the 
Answer  to  the  Remonstrance  sent  to  the  Bishops  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
Church."     I'hilad.  1827,  pp.  14,  15. 

Why  do  we  publish  these  things.'  Because  they  are  facts — they  are  now 
matiers  of  history  —  they  are  given  from  episcopal  authorities,  on/j/,  — they  are 
in  direct  confirmation  of  our  position,  which  is  of  great  importance  —  and 
because  they  are  demanded  by  those  who  have  undertaken  to  read  frequent 
lectures  in  their  public  prints  upon  the  quarrelling,  &,c.  of  presbyterJans. 


NOTE   D. 

THE  REV.  JOHN  HOLT    RICE,  D.     D.,  ON    HIGH-CHURCK    PRINCIPLES,  OPPOSED  TO 
THE  GENIUS  OF  OUR  REPUBLICAN  INSTITUTIONS. 

As  to  the  distinction  between  high  and  low-church,  it  is  readily  admitted, 
that  no  line  has  ever  been  drawn,  which  clearly  separates  the  whole  episcopal 
church  into  two  parlies.  But  what  then  .'  Do  not  the  parties  exist .'  In  the 
late  presidential  contest,  were  there  not  many  citizens  exactly  in  the  predica- 
ment of  a  very  pleasant  and  facetious  gentleman,  named  Christo-phcr  Qiumdary, 
who,  peace  to  his  memory  !  lived  not  four  years  ago.-"  And  if  a  real  line,  lit- 
erally cutting  the  body  politic,  as  the  mathematicians  cut  a  circle,  had  been 
drawn,  would  not  many  of  our  fellow-citizens  have  been  bisected.''  But  was 
there  no  palpable  distinction,  after  all,  between  the  Coalition  and  the  Combina- 
tion ;  betvveen  Adamsites  and  Jacksonians  ! 

To  the  student  of  ecclesiastical  history,  scarcely  any  thing  is  more  familiar 
than  the  distinction  betvveen  high  and  low-church.  It  began  at  least  as  early 
as  the  reign  of  Charles  I.  Let  your  respectable  correspondent  consult  the 
"  illustrious  Mosheira,"  (as Bishop  Horsley  calls  him,)  [Cent.  xvii.  part  2,  chap. 
2,  sec.  20,]  and  he  will  find  that  Charles  had  directed  all  the  exertions  of  his 
zeal,  and  the  whole  tenor  of  his  administration  towards  three  objects,  of  which 
the  second  was,  "  the  reduction  of  all  the  churches  in  Great  Britain  and  Ire- 
land, under  the  jurisdiction  of  bishops,  whose  government  he  looked  upon  as 
of  divine  institution,  and  also  as  most  adapted  to  guard  the  privileges  and  maj- 
esty of  the  throne."  No  doubt,  he  had  learned  the  favorite  maxim  of  his  royal 
father,  "  no  Bishop,  no  King." 

Your  correspondent  may  next,  if  he  pleases,  turn  to  pp.  505 — 9,  of  the  same 
work,  (vol.  ii.  4to.  edition,)  and  he  will  find  an  account  of  the  Intitadinnrians, 
or  low-chvrclimen,  and  of  the  high -churchmen,  or  chnrcli  tories.  Of  the  former, 
this  learned  historian  writes  tiius  : — "They  were  zealously  attached  to  the 
forms  of  ecclesiastical  government  and  worship,  that  were  established  in  the 
Church  of  England,  and  they  rt'commended  episcopacy  with  all  the  strength 
and  power  of  their  eloquence  ;  hut  ihrij  did  not  go  so  far  as  to  look  upon  it  as  of 
divine  ins'iiution,  or  as  absolutely  and  indispensably  necessary  to  the  constitu- 
tion of  a  christian  church,  and  hence  they  maintained  that  those  wlio  followed 
other  forms  of  government  and  worshin,  were  not,  on  that  account,  to  be  ex- 
cluded from  their  communion,  or  to  forfeit  the  title  of  brethren."  Among 
these  low-churchmen,  he  mentions  the  names  of  Hales,  Chillingworth,  More, 
Cud  worth.  Gale,  Whichcot,  and  Tillotson.  Now,  I  only  ask  here,  were  not 
such  men  as  these,  sound  episcor)aliaiis,  and  true  sons  of  the  church.-'  Mos- 
lieim  further  informs  us,  that  the  high-churchmen  were  so  called,  "  on  account 
of  the  high  notions  which  they  cnlerlaincd  of  the  dignity  and  poioer  of  the  church, 


336  NOTES   TO    LECTURE    XIII. 

and  the  extent  they  gave  to  its  prerogative  and  jurisdiction."  Some  of  their 
principles  are  fully  embodied  in  the  famous  Jicl  of  Uniformilij,  "  in  consequence 
of  which,"  says  the  historian,  "  the  validity  of  presbytcrian  ordination  was 
renounced,  the  ministrations  of  foreign  cliurches  disowned,"  &c. 

Tiie  same  distinction  is  recoi^nized  by  the  learned  Jublonsky,  who,  in  his 
Ecclesiastical  History,  (vol.  iii.  p.  342,)  gives  us  a  specimen  of  high-churcii 
principles,  as  held  by  the  learned  and  famous  Henry  DodwelL.  He  maintained 
"that  a  bishop  is  tlie  vicar  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  governs  the  church  over 
which  he  is  appointed,  by  the  authority,  and  in  the  place  of  Christ,"  &c. 

If  furllier  evidence  were  needed,  one  might  refer  to  the  History  of  the  Ban- 
goiian  Controversy  —  to  Bishop  Burnet's  History  of  His  Own  Times — to 
Neale's  History  of  the  Puritans,  &c.  Burnet  says  that  "  an  inclination  t<>  favor 
Dissenters  passed  among:  many  for  a  more  heinous  thing  than  a  leaning  to 
popery  itself"     (Vol.  ii.  p.  145,  folio  edition  ) 

Here,  again,  1  only  ask,  is  it  necessary,  in  order  to  one's  being  a  good  epis- 
copalian, that  he  should  be  a  high-churchman  ?     Let  any  one  answer  who  will. 

it  is  evident,  that  tiie  distinction  which  originated  two  centuries  ago,  and 
wliich  is  as  familiar  as  "  household  words  "  to  every  one  versed  in  ecclesiasti- 
cal history,  exists  in  lull  force  in  this  country.  For  proof,  I  refer  to  the  events 
connected  with  the  election  of  a  bishop,  assistant  to  the  venerable  Bishop 
While,  of  Pennsylvania  ;  and  the  attempt  lo  elect  a  successor  to  the  late  ven- 
erable Bishop  Kemp,  of  Maryland. 

But  1  am  required  to  show  that  1  have  given  a  just  account  of  the  principles 
of  high-churchmen.  And  the  very  worth}'  gentleman  whose  letter  lias  called 
forth  these  remarks,  has  intimated  tiiat  if  I  can  do  this,  he  is  willing  to  give 
them  u[)  to  my  fiercest  denunciations.  Nothing  can  be  moie  easy  than  the 
task  assigned.  But  as  for  the  men  themselves,  I  liave  no  denunciations  to 
make.  Only,  if  they  nuist  be  ejjiscopalians,  let  them  be  such  sons  of  the 
church  as  Tillotson  and  Chillingworth.     As  for  the  proof — why,  gentlemen, 

{our  ample  paper,  should  you  leave  out  every  thing  else  for  a  week,  would  not 
old  all  the  quotations  at  hand.  I  shall  not,  however,  ask  for  more  than  a  col- 
umn or  so  for  this  purpose. 

But  first,  allow  me  to  make  an  assertion.  There  is  not  in  the  United  States 
a  high-churchman,  who  does  not  disown  the  validity  of  all  but  episcopal  urdi- 
nation,  and  refuse  to  interithange  ministerial  services  with  clergymen  of  any 
other  denomination  :  not  one  of  them  will  acknowledge  any  of  their  ft  Uow- 
christians  in  other  societies,  as  members  of  the  church  of  Christ ;  nor  will 
tiiey  go  to  their  communion  table.  If  your  respectable  correspondent  doubts 
this,  let  him  ask  the  minister  of  his  own  parish. 

He,  however,  calls  for  proof.     The  following  must  suffice  :  — 

"  When  the  gospel  is  proclaimed,  communion  with  the  church  by  participa- 
tion of  its  ordinances,  at  the  hands  of  the  duly  aiitkori'.cd  priesthood,  is  the  in- 
dispcnsalile  condition  of  salvation.  Separation  from  the  prescribed  government, 
and  regular  priesthood  of  tlie  church,  when  it  proceeds  from  involuntary  and 
unavoidable  ignorance  or  error,  we  have  reason  to  trust,  will  not  intercept  from 
the  humble,  the  penitent,  and  obedient,  the  blessing  of  God's  favor.  But 
when  we  humbly  submit  to  that  priesthood  which  Christ  and  his  apostles  con- 
stituted ;  when,  in  the  lively  e.xercise  of  penitence  and  faith,  we  partake  of  the 
ordinances  administered  by  them,  we  maintain  our  communion  with  that 
church,  which  the  Redeemer  purchased  with  his  blood,"  &.c. 

After  another  salvo  for  those  who  labor  under  involuntary  error,  the  writer 
proceeds  thus: 

"  But  great  is  the  guilt,  and  imminent  the  danger  of  those  who,  possessing 
the  means  of  arriving  at  the  knowledge  of  the  truth,  ncgligcnthj  or  wilfully 
continue  in  a  state  of  separation  from  tiie  authorized  ininisiry  of  the  church,  and 
participate  of  ordinances  administered  by  an  irrigular  and  invalid  authority. 
Wilfully  rending  the  ppace  and  unity  of  the  church,  hy  separating  from  the 
ministrations  of  its  authorized  priesthood;  obsiinately  cimtemning  the  means 
which  God,  in  his  sovereign  pleasure,  Intli  prescribed  for  their  salvaliim,  tliey 
are  guilty  of  rebe'lion  against  their  Almighty  Lawiriver  and  Judge  ;  they  ex- 
pose themselves  to  the  awful  displeasure  of  that  Almighty  Jehovah,  who  will 
not  permit  his  institutions  to  be  contemned,  or  his  authority  violated  with  im- 


NOTES    TO    LECTURE    XIII.  337 

punity."  —  ["  Companion  for  the  Altar,"  by  the  Rev.  John  Henry  (now  Bish- 
op) Hobart.     New  Yorl{,pp.202and204.] 

"  Episcopalians  present  these  doctrines  to  their  hearers,  in  the  full  persttasion 
that  the  church,  the  jninistrij,  and  the  sacraments,  arc  as  distinctly  and  truly  ap- 
pointments of  God,  for  the  salvation  of  sinners,  as  faith  of  the  Gospel,  and  that 
only  as  these  arc  united  in  the  profession  of  religion,  can  the  hope  thereby  given  to 
a  man  be  worthy  of  the  name  of  assurance. 

"  Episcopalians  consider  the  grace  and  mercy  of  the  gospel  as  matters  of 
strict  covenant  stipulation  ;  as  bound  up  with  the  authority  to  dispense  them  ; 
•03  inseparable  from  that  authority ;  and  only  by  virtue  of  that  authority,  (with 
reverence  be  it  spoken.)  pledging  the  glorious  Source  of  all  mercy  and  grace  to 
his  creatures."  —  Doctrines  of  the  Church  Vindicated,  by  Bishop  Ravenscroft, 
pp.  31,32. 

"  You  ask,  does  episcopal,  in  contradistinction  to  presbyterial  ordination,  en- 
ter into  the  essence  of  the  church  of  Christ .''  To  this  1  answer,  without  the 
slightest  hesitation,  that  it  does;  and  for  this  plain  reason  —  because  I  believe 
the  one  to  have  a  divine  and  verifiable  commission  to  ordain,  which  the  other 
does  not  possess."  —  Id.  pp.  43,  44. 

"  The  authority  of  Christ  is  the  only  warrant  to  act  in  his  name  ;  and  suc- 
cession from  his  apostles,  the  only  satisfactory  evidence,  that  any  man  or  body 
of  men  are  possessed  of  this  warrant  And,  from  the  very  nature  of  things, 
minislerial  commission  and  authority  can  no  otherwise  be  so  verified,  as  to  be 
consistent  with  assurance,  as  to  the  validity  and  efficacy  of  religious  ministra- 
tions in  the  name  of  Christ.  The  ministry  of  the  church  is  a  substitution  for 
the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  in  person,"  &c. —  Id.  p.  47. 

"  When  you  baptize,  do  you  not  profess  to  bring  an  alien  into  covenant  with 
God,  and  seal  him  to  the  day  of  redemption  ?  When  you  administer  the 
Lord's  supper,  do  you  not  negotiate  afresli  th-"'  pardon  of  the  penitent,  and 
replenish  and  confirm  the  grace  of  worthy  partakers .-'  When  you  visit  the 
sick  and  dying,  are  not  the  consolations  of  religion  at  your  disposal,  according 
to  the  circumstances  of  the  case .''"  — Id.  p.  28. 

Is  not  this  proof  enough  ?  I  might  go  on  to  show  that  high-churchmen 
deny  tlie  sufficiency  of  the  scriptures,  and  attribute  to  the  church  —  by  which 
they  undoubtedly  mean  in  this  connexion,  the  clergy  —  the  right  of  authorita- 
tively interpreting  the  scriptures.  For  that,  says  a  bishop,  is  to  be  received  as 
the  true  meaning  of  scripture,  which  the  church,  in  every  age,  has  declared 
to  be  its  meaning. 

Allow  me  to  repeat,  gentlemen,  that  none  of  the  opinions  above  staled,  are 
necessary  to  constitute  men  episcopalians.  Otherwise,  Cranmer  and  his  noble 
compeers  and  successors,  down  to  the  davs  of  Laud,  were  not  episcopalians. 
Even  the  judicious  Hooker,  the  mighty  Chillingworth,  the  eloquent  Tillotson, 
and  hundreds  of  others,  the  ornaments  of  the  Church  of  England,  and  in 
whose  services  the  universal  church  has  rejoiced,  must  be  disowned  as  sound 
and  true  episcopalians.  In  my  attack  on  high-church  principles,  then,  might 
I  not,  with  the  utmost  propriety,  declare,  that  1  make  no  assault  on  the  episco- 
pal church  —  or  on  individuals  as  episcopalians  —  bul  only  as  high-churchmen  ? 
Suppose  that  an  honest  Englishman,  in  writing  on  the  constitulion  and  gov- 
ernment of  this  country,  should  severely  censure  the  enormous  patronage  of 
the  federal  executive  ;  might  he  not  justly  say,  I  am  not  censuring  the  Amer- 
icans, considered  as  republicans,  l)ut  as  pursuing  a  practice  not  at  all  necessary, 
to  say  the  least,  to  constitute  them  members  of  a  free  commonwealth.''  He 
might  write  as  awkwardly  as  Jeremy  Bentham,  but  my  life  on  it,  no  one  in  a 
thousand  of  the  citizens  of  this  country  would  mistake  his  meaning,  or  rail 
against  him  as  a  hostile  assailant.  True,  if  we  could  not  be  republicans  at  all, 
without  this  great  executive  patronage,  there  would  be  no  room  for  the  dis- 
tinction. But  as  the  case  is,  the  distinction  is  made  every  day,  and  so  respec- 
table and  amiable  a  gentleman  as  your  correspondent,  required  some  excite- 
ment, surely,  before  he  could  refuse  to  admit  it. 

Again  :  I  am  represented  as  injurious,  for  saying  that  high-church  princi- 
ples are  opposed  to  the  genius  of  our  institutions.  It  is  useless  to  disclaim,  in 
presence  of  heated  partisans,  all  intention  of  doinor  injury.  But  if  I  can  fairly 
prove  the  soundness  of  my  opinions,  the   impartial    will   acquit  me  of  evil  in- 

43 


33S  NOTES    TO    LECTURE    XIII. 

tention,  in  giving  them  utterance.  1  sliow  no  enmity  when  I  tell  the  truth. 
Hear,  then,  my  reasons. 

Tlie  laws  of  our  country  secure  perfect  religious  liberty  to  every  citizen  : 
and  ail  have  equal  rights.  Methodists,  baptists,  presbyterians,  lulherana,  epis- 
copalians, &c.  all  stand  on  the  same  level.  And  the  ministers  of  any  one  reli- 
gious denomination  have,  according  to  tlie  law  of  the  land,  the  same  authority 
to  leacli,  and  administer  ordinances,  as  those  of  any  other  denomination.  Mar- 
riage celebrated  by  a  dissenter,  is  as  valid,  and  as  sacred,  as  though  the  service 
were  performed  b)'  an  archbishop.  But  the  high-churchmen,  to  a  man,  main- 
tain that  none  have  a  right  to  teach  or  administer  ordinances,  save  only  minis- 
ters of  their  church.  Indeed  there  is  no  church  —  tliere  are  no  true  sacra- 
ments—  no  valid  administrations,  but  theirs.  Now  here  is  direct  opposition. 
The  law  of  the  land  says  one  thing ;  high-churchmen  affirm  directly  the  con- 
trary. 

There  is,  indeed,  a  just  distinction  between  civil  and  fcclesiastical  rights; 
and  the  high-churchman  is  by  no  means  charged  with  confounding  them.  He 
doubtless  knows  and  admits  that,  in  this  country,  the  men  whom  he  persists 
in  calling  dissenters,  have  a  civil  right  to  do  what  he  denies  that  they  are 
authorized  to  do  by  the  law  of  Christ's  church.  But  this  does  not  destroy  the 
force  of  the  allegation.  Because,  the  religious  principle,  when  excited,  is  the 
most  powerful  in  human  nature.  The  interest  created  l)y  religion  is  all-ab- 
sorbing in  its  influence  ;  it  reaches  to  all  n)an's  relations  and  concerns.  More 
than  any  thing  else,  it  comes  home  to  his  "  business  and  bosom."  "  It  is  like 
leaven,  which  a  woman  took  and  hid  in  three  measures  of  meal,  until  the 
whole  was  leavened."  One  must  be  quite  ignorant  of  the  history  of  religion, 
to  deny,  that  it  is  comparatively  easy  to  persuade  a  man,  that  any  thing  is 
totally  and  absolutely  wrong,  which  he  believes  to  be  opposed  to  the  funda- 
mental principles  of  his  religion.  But  the  quotations  made  above,  show  that 
high-churchmen  regard  the  particular  form  of  the  church,  as  essential  to  being 
of  the  church.     It  is,  in  fact,  a  question  of  church  ok  no  church,  and  all 

WHO  ARE  not  members  OF  THE  EPISCOPAL  CHURCH  ARE  UNDER  "  GREAT 

GUILT."  The  whole  body  of  American  christians,  belonging  to  non-episcopal 
churches,  are  schismatics,  and  without  any  assurance  of  salvation,  are  left  to 
uncovenanted  mercies.  It  is  the  church,  ministry,  and  sacraments,  which 
render  the  scriptures  sufficient,  ^-c.  I  ask,  then,  is  not  a  religious  man,  who 
has  adopted  high-church  principles,  under  the  influence  of  a  cause,  which  op- 
erates against  the  American  principles  of  perfect  religious  liberty  .'  Let  intel- 
ligent and  impartial  men  judge. 

It  would  require  more  room,  I  fear,  than  yon  could  afford,  to  adduce  histori- 
cal evidence  in  support  of  these  "  reasonings  "  —  for  so  with  Mr.  G's  leave  — 
pace  tanti  tiri,  I  must  call  them.  Let  me  only  ask,  who  supported  the  courts 
of  high  commission,  and  the  star-chamber.'  Who  were  the  stanch  advocates 
of  all  the  arbitrary  measures  of  the  house  of  Stuart.'  Who  opposed  the  glori- 
ous revolution  of  16S8  .-'  and  who  were  the  enemies  of  our  own  more  glorious 
revolution,  but  high-churchmen .'  On  the  other  hand,  in  all  these  instances, 
did  not  low-churchmen  and  dissenters,  as  far  as  politics  were  concerned,  unite 
heartily,  and  cooperate  vigorously  .''  The  faitliful  records  of  history  afford,  on 
this  subject,  a  series  of  most  instructive  facts,  and  warrant  the  strongest  con- 
clusions as  to  the  tendency  of  high-church  principles. 

But  while  impartial  men  easily  see  the  truth  of  these  statements,  it  may  not 
be  so  obvious  to  the  most  respectable  and  intelligent,  whose  minds  are  filled 
with  the  prejudices  of  education,  and  excited  by  the  heals  of  controversy. 
And  unhappily,  this  has  long  been  a  subject  of  controversy.  How  can  it  be 
otherwise,  when  high-churchmen  proclaim,  that  all  the  authority  of  the  church 
is  in  their  hands  ;  but  as  for  us,  our  ministers,  they  say,  are  intruders  into  the 
sacred  office ;  our  sacraments  arc  invalid  ;  our  hopes  unwarranted  ;  and  our 
meetings  schismatical  assemblages.     In  this  state  of  things   there  will, 

AND  THERE  OUGHT  TO  BE,  CONTROVERSY.  ThE  HIGH-CHURCHMEN  WILL  EN- 
DEAVOR TO  SUPPORT  THEIR  DIGNITY;  AND  DISSENTERS  OUGHT  TO  MAINTAIN 
THEIR  RIGHTS,  AND  TO  "  STAND  FAST  IN  THAT  LIBERTY,  WHEREWITH  ChRIST 
HAS  MADE  THEM  FREE."  YeS,  THERE  MUST  BE  CONTROVERSY,  WHILE  EXTRAV- 
AGANT CLAIMS  ARE  PUT  IN  ON  ONE  SIDE,  AND    THE  SPIRIT  OF  RELIGIOUS    FREE- 


NOTES    TO    LECTURE    XIII. 


339 


DOM  EXISTS  ON  THE  OTHER.  But,  it  may  be  asked,  do  not  high-churchmen 
declare  that  the  effect,  of  wliich  1  speaic,  has  not  been  produced  on  their  tninds  ; 
and  do  tiiey  not  indignantly  repel  the  charge  made  against  their  principles? 
Undoubtedly  they  do  —  and  I  admit,  with  the  utmost  sincerity.  The  reason 
is,  without  any  very  strong  religious  feeling,  they  are,  in  this  country,  under 
the  influence  of  powerful,  counteracting  causes.  A  man's  opinions  are  the 
results  of  all  the  intellectual  forces  which  bear  on  his  mind.  And  in  a  given 
case,  to  form  any  thing  like  a  correct  judgment  rcsj)ecling  the  tendency  of  a 
particular  sentiment,  we  must  know  all  the  circumstances  which  operate  on 
the  understanding.  In  the  present  age,  a  very  great  majority  of  our  fellow 
citizens  are  opposed  to  high-church  principles;  and  the  current  of  public  opin- 
ion in  favor  of  liberty,  civil  and  religious,  is  irresistible.  The  balance  of  all 
the  forces  which  press  the  mind,  is  therefore  in  favor  of  the  institutions  of  the 
country.  But  who  can  say  that  this  would  be  the  case,  if  a  majority  of  the 
nation  held  high-church  principles.^  In  England,  notwithstanding  many  a 
hard  struggle,  the  act  of  uniformity  was  not  repealed,  until  England  had  a 
presbyterian  king,  and  lovv-churclimen  got  into  power.  The  Corporation  and 
Test  Acts  could  not  be  abolished,  until  it  was  done  by  dissenters  and  low- 
churchmen.  Who  would  not  be  sorely  unwilling  to  trust  his  religious  liberty 
with  those  who  have  power,  and  who  sincerely  believe  that  none  but  them- 
selves are  of  the  true  church,  or  have  ecclesiastical  authority.' 

I  have  never  said,  or  thought,  that  any  of  my  fellow-christians  of  any  de- 
nomination, are,  in  this  age,  unfriendly  to  the  institutions  of  our  common 
country  But  1  have  said,  and  I  do  still  believe,  that  high-church  principles 
are,  in  their  nature,  opposed  to  the  genius  of  American  institutions.  And  how 
far  the  leaven  may  work,  who  can  pretend  to  say  ?  The  silent,  8tea.dy,  pow- 
erful operation  of  a  moral  cause,  such  as  that  of  religion,  may,  in  this  modifi- 
cation of  it,  produce  results  entirely  unexpected,  and  undesired  too,  by  any 
christian  now  living  in  the  United  States.  If  the  records  of  past  time  afford 
any  ground  for  reasoning,  as  to  the  future,  I  feel  that  I  am  justified  in  all  that 
I  have  written  on  the  subject. 

And  feeling  thus,  I  protest  against  the  inference,  that  I  intended  to  excite 
odium  against  any  denomination  of  christians.  I  meant  to  show,  that  particu- 
lar sentiments,  not  necessary  to  constitute  a  man  a  genuine  episcopalian, 
ought  to  be  renounced.  1  meant  to  do  all  in  my  power  to  insure  their  renun- 
ciation ;  and  this  in  the  full  persuasion  that  the  church  would  flourish  more, 
and  be  better  able  to  do  her  part  in  the  great  work  which  must  be  done  by 
American  christians,  without  these  principles  than  with  them.  Believe  ine, 
gentlemen,  —  all  persons  of  truly  liberal  minds  can  believe — that  my  chief 
concern,  as  a  minister  of  the  gospel,  is  that  the  power  of  christian  truth  may 
be  felt,  and  the  blessings  of  genuine  religion  may  be  enjoyed,  by  all  in  our 
country.  But  this,  I  am  persuaded,  can  never  be  the  case,  while  the  form  and 
manner  in  which  the  truth  is  communicated,  is  regarded  as  equally  essential 
with  the  truth  itself.  "  In  Christ  Jesus,  neither  circumcision  availeth  any 
thing,  nor  uncircumcision,  but  a  new  creature." 

Your  correspondent  represents,  in  pretty  strong  terms,  that  I  bring  a  chargfi 
of  stupidity  against  great  numbers,  including  many  most  able  and  respectable 
men,  when  I  say  that  high-churchmen  do  not  perceive  the  consequences  of 
their  own  principles.  I  must  confess  that  this  charge  surprised  me  not  a  little. 
And  the  more  I  have  considered  the  matter,  the  more  I  am  surprised  that  Mr. 
Garnett  should  have  given  it  such  a  turn  as  this.  Whether  there  are  many 
thousands  of  high-churchmen  in  the  United  States,  he  certainly  ought  to 
know  better  than  1  do.  But  how  he  can  speak  so  confidently,  if  the  line  of 
discrimination  has  not  been  clearly  drawn  between  them  and  low-churchmen, 
it  is  not  for  me  to  say.  I  cannot  believe,  however,  without  very  strong  evi- 
dence, that  in  this  country,  and  in  the  nineteenth  century,  there  are  many 
thousands  of  •protcslmits,  who  believe  that  cleraymen  are  the  substitutes  for  the 
person  (vicars)  of  Christ  on  earth  ;  that,  by  them  alone,  the  Source  of  all  grace 
can  be  pledged  to  falfd  his  own  engagements ;  that  great  guilt  rests  on  a  man 
for  not  being  a  member  of  the  episco[jal  church  ;  that  ordination  by  a  diocesan 
bishop  is  necessary  to  constitute  a  true  clergyman  ;  that  the  administration  of  all 
others  are  entirely  invalid  and  null ;  and  that  none  but  episcopalians  have  any 


340  NOTES   TO    LECTURE    XIII. 

warranted   hope  of  heaven,  &c.     I  should  suppose  the  number  very  small. 

But  this  does  not  much  affect  the  main  point  now  before  us 

It  is  well  known  that  the  matters  involved  in  the  high-church  controversy 
are  very  little  studied  by  the  great  body  of  the  people.  1  was  once  asked  by  a 
very  intelligent  episcopalian,  with  whom  I  had  the  pleasure  of  daily  affection- 
ate intercourse,  "  What  is  tlie  reason  why  our  ministers  say,  you  have  no  right 
to  administer  the  sacraments?"  Indeed,  the  subject  of  ecclesiastical  polity 
is  rarely  made  one  of  careful  and  continued  examination.  Its  Idstory  has 
never  yet  been  adequately  treated  ;  and  it  is  not  too  nmch  to  say,  that  its  bear- 
ing on  civil  and  religious  interests  is  not  generally  understood.  The  preju- 
dices of  education,  or  family  influences,  for  the  most  part,  determine  people's 
church  connexions,  and  veiy  often  men  become  heated  with  controversy,  be- 
fore they  have  thoroughly  examined  the  subject  in  debate.  It  is  so  in  politics, 
as  well  as  religion.  In  all  such  cases,  it  is  very  common  to  say,  without 
any  imputation  of  stupidity,  intended  or  understood,  surely  you  do  not  per- 
ceive the  consequences  of  your  principles.  To  charge  an  adversary  with  con- 
sequences which  he  disavows,  is  intolerable.  To  state  consequences  as  legiti- 
mately deducible  fram  his  principles,  is  another  affair.  To  state  them  as  an 
objection  to  the  principles  themselves  is  a  very  common  method  of  arguing. 
If  the  objection  is  decisive,  and  the  antagonist  still  holds  his  opinion,  whiit 
can  one  do,  but  say  as  in  this  case  I  have  said  to  high-churchmen  ?  The 
present  tariff  is  occasion  of  great  controversy.  Half  the  nation,  and  perhaps 
more,  with  the  venerable  ex- President  Madison  at  their  head,  believe  it  to  be 
constitutional ;  very  many  of  our  ablest  politicians,  on  the  oth^r  hand,  think 
it  a  violation  of  the  Constitution.  What  then  ?  Shall  it  be  said  that  the  ma- 
jority design  to  violate  that  sacred  instrument .''  Surely  not.  Can  they  say 
any  thing  else  than  this  .^  —  Gentlemen,  you  do  not  perceive  the  consequences 
of  your  own  reasoning  on  this  subject.  How  furious  umst  be  the  partisanship 
of  the  man,  who  should  start  up  and  exclaim,  "  So  you  include  us  all  in  one 
sweeping  charge  of  stupidity.  Very  modest,  and  very  charitable,  truly  !  " 
It  surely  would  not  be  worth  while  to  take  as  much  time  to  answer  a  declara- 
tion of  this  kind,  as  I  have  employed  in  hastily  writing  the  above  remarks 

A  sense  of  justice,  as  well  as  inclination,  prompts  me  here  to  remark,  that, 
in  the  times  of  which  I  speak,  only  one  man  among  the  reformers  had  the 
penetration  to  discover  a  sure  method,  by  which  the  undue  power  of  the 
clergy  may  be  restrained,  even  when  religion  has  no  connexion  with  govern- 
ment. He  was  bred  to  the  law  ;  but  having  embraced  the  doctrines  of  the 
reformation,  he  became  the  best  ecclesi.istical  historian,  and  the  ablest  com- 
mentator on  the  Bible,  of  his  age.  His  consummate  knowledoe  in  these  de- 
partments of  learning,  enabled  him  to  approximate  very  nearly  to  the  primitive 
polity  and  discipline  of  the  church.  And  although  his  character  was  colored 
by  the  spirit  of  his  times,  yet  he  had  the  sagacity  to  see,  that,  by  making  all 
clergymen  equal,  and  giving  laymen  a  place  in  the  government  and  discipline 
of  the  church,  a  complete  check  might  be  laid  on  clerical  power.  "When  he 
had  made  this  discovery,  he  boldly  taught,  that  the  only  province  of  the  civil 
magistrate  was  the  protection  of  religion.  It  was  this  principle,  and  by  no 
naeans  his  theological  doctrine,  which  rendered  him  so  obnoxious  to  the  friends 
of  arbitrary  power,  in  every  country.  /  speak  of  John  Calvin.  And  it  is  right 
curious,  that,  in  every  age,  down  to  the  present,  his  biterest  enemies  have  al- 
ways been  found  among  those  lohose  church  government  most  approximates  to  a 
monarchy.  It  is  true,  too,  that  all  the  principles  of  religious  liberty  which  are 
now  imbodied  in  the  fundamental  laws  of  our  country,  were  taught  by  men  of 
Calvin's  school,  long  before  the  fathers  of  those  who  framed  our  institutions 
were  born.  These  principles  were  brought  with  them,  by  many  of  the  first 
settleis  of  this  western  wilderness.  Our  revolution  only  gave  them  clearer 
developement,  and  more  universal  acceptation.  And  now,  while  religion  is  es- 
tablished by  law,  in  every  other  country  in  the  world,  in  ours  it  is  perfectly 
free  Will  it  continue  so .''  Who  can  tell  .■'  The  causes  which  influence 
public  opinion,  and  produce  changes  in  national  character,  are  slow  in  their 
operation  ;  and  the  result  of  our  experiment  is  yet  hid  in  futurity 

It  is  of  the  utmost  importance,  that  the  real  genius  and  character  of  Chris- 
tianity should  be  generally  understood.     It  cannot  otherwise  exert  its  full 


NOTES    TO   LECTURE    XIII.  341 

moral  influence.  All  men  ought  to  know,  that  he  is  a  christian,  entitled  to  all 
the  privileges  of  the  church  and  all  the  hopes  of  salvation,  who  so  believes  the 
truth  as  to  repent  and  live  a  holy  life;  no  matter  by  what  name  he  is  called, 
or  from  what  minister  he  received  the  sacraments.  Arrogant  and  exclusive 
pretensions  produce  discord  ;  and  an  undue  regard  to  external  observances 
makes  infidels  of  some,  formalists  of  others,  and  fanatics  of  others.  1  call  that 
an  undue  regard,  which  values  outward  observances,  not  for  the  truth  which 
they  represent,  but  for  the  form  with  which  tliey  are  clothed.  The  law  of  the 
land  knows  no  difference  between  men  of  different  religious  persuasions ;  and 
it  is  highly  important  that  public  opinion  should  so  far  accord  with  the  spirit 
of  the  law,  as  to  exert  its  mighty  energies  against  those  who  make  mere  external 
differences  amount  to  the  vital  question  of  "  church  or  no  church."  To 
insure  peace  and  tranquillity  in  a  religious  community,  the  different  denomina- 
tions must  be  liberal  enough  to  acknowledge  each  other  as  brethren. 

To  keep  religion  and  its  teachers  in  their  proper  places,  I  should  think  it 
very  important  that  the  people  should  understand  the  true  nature  of  ecclesias- 
tical authority ;  with  whom  it  is  lodged ;  and  how  it  is  to  be  exercised.  With- 
out entering  into  this  subject,  allow  me  to  present  a  brief  contrast  of  high  and 
low-church  principles. 

Low-churchmen  maintain  that  ecclesiastical  power  is,  according  to  the  will 
of  Christ,  vested  in  the  church.  High-churchmen  hold  that  it  belongs  to  the 
clergy. 

Low-churchmen  hold  that  it  particularly  appertains  to  the  church,  either 
collectively  or  by  their  representatives,  to  admit  members  into  the  christian 
society.     High-churchmen  hold  that  this  is  the  sole  prerogative  of  clergymen. 

In  correspondence  with  this,  low-churchmen  are  of  opinion  that  expulsion 
from  the  society  cannot  take  place  without  the  act  of  the  society.  High- 
churchmen  believe  that  excommunication  is  a  part  of  clerical  prerogative. 

The  former  teach  tliat  the  sacraments  are  nothing  more  than  very  interest- 
ing methods  of  exhibiting  truth  and  enforcing  obligation ;  while  the  latter 
maintain  that  the  duly  authorized  clegyman,  by  administering  the  sacraments, 
confers  grace. 

The  fundamental  principle  of  the  one  is,  the  sufficiency  of  the  scriptures; 
the  other  denies  this,  and  maintains  that  the  church,  ministry,  and  sacraments 
are  integral  parts  of  the  plan  of  salvation. 

The  low-churchman  earnestly  contends  for  the  right  of  private  judgment; 
his  antagonist  asserts  that  the  church  has  authority  to  declare  the  sense  of 
Bcriptuie,  and  determine  what  articles  of  faith  it  contains. 

This  one  does  not  believe  that  any  particular  form  of  church  government  is 
prescribed  in  the  New  Testament,  but  only  general  principles,  the  application 
of  which  is  left  to  the  discretion  of  the  church.  The  other  is  fierce  for  the 
jus  ditinum  ;  and  stoutly  maintains  that  the  three  orders  are  essential  to  the 
being  of  a  church.     At  any  rate,  no  bishop,  no  church. 

The  low-churchman  thinks  that,  in  case  of  necessity,  the  people  may  call  a 
brother  to  the  ministry;  and  even  in  ordinary  cases  there  ought  to  be  a  judg- 
ment of  the  people  in  favor  of  a  candidate,  before  he  is  called  to  the  pastoral 
office.  But  the  high-churchman  is  convinced,  that  ordination  is  impossible, 
unless  a  bishop  is  present  to  communicate  something  which  he  has  derived 
from  the  apostles,  and  winch  no  one  but  a  bishop  ever  can  possess. 

The  low-churchman  acknowledges  as  ministers  of  the  gospel,  all,  who,  with 
the  consent  (formally  expressed)  of  any  christian  people,  preach  the  true  doc- 
trine of  Christ,  and  all  as  fellow-christians,  who  so  receive  this  doctrine  as  to 
repent  and  live  holy  lives.  But  with  the  high-churchman,  no  man  is  to  be 
received  as  a  minister  who  has  not  been  episcopally  ordained;  and  none  are 
christians  who  are  not  united  with  the  bishop. 

Now,  in  a  country  where  religion  is  perfectly  free,  and  is  of  course  out  of 
the  reach  of  the  law  and  the  government,  I  would  ask,  which  best  accord  with 
the  genius  of  our  institutions  —  low,  or  high-church  principles.'  Let  the 
impartial  decide. 

And  if  religion  should  prevail,  so  as  generally  to  influence  public  opinion  — 
and  that  it  will  I  have  no  doubt — let  rne  ask,  which  principles  of  ecclesiastical 
polity  will  be  most  likely  to  operate  in  favor  of  American  institutions,  those 
which  exalt,  or  those  which  restrain,  the  powers  of  the  clergj'  •' 


342  NOTES    TO    LECTURE    XIII. 

And,  finally,  may  not  the  danger  of  the  church  becoming  the  paramount 
authority  in  the  nation,  and  so  superinducing  all  the  unutterable  evils  of  a 
corrupt  religion,  be  best  avoided  by  that  system  which  fully  recognizes  that 
fundamental  principle  of  religious  liberty,  tiie  right  of  private  judgment; 
which  connnits  the  management  of  ecclesiastical  concerns  equally  to  laymen 
and  clergymen,  and  renders  it  impossible  that  the  people  should  be  oppressed, 
unless  they  choose  to  oppress  themselves?  Again,  I  say,  let  an  impartial 
public  decide. 

In  conclusion,  I  must  be  permitted  in  justice  to  myself  to  say,  that  I  have 
never  yet  endeavored  to  perKsuade  a  human  being  to  change  his  religious  con- 
nexions. And,  although  I  have,  what  appears  to  me,  a  just  preference  for  a 
particular  mode  of  worship,  and  form  of  church  government,  I  have,  in  no 
case,  represented  this  as  essential  to  Christianity,  or  disowned  brotherhood 
with  those  who,  in  matters  of  external  observance,  differ  from  the  church  to 
which  I  belong.  And  further  :  I  have  never  engaged  in  controversy,  except 
for  the  purpose  of  showing  that  differences  of  this  kind  ought  to  put  no  bar 
in  the  way  of  communion,  and  produce  no  breach  of  christian  fellowship.  1 
have,  however,  felt  it  to  be  a  most  sacred  duty,  both  as  a  christian  and  a  citizen, 
to  do  what  I  could  to  put  down  contrary  opinions  :  as  a  christian,  because 
these  opinions  appear  to  me  to  be  opposed  to  the  genius  of  Christianity  — as  a 
citizen,  because  I  think  them  contrary  to  the  spirit  of  our  political  institutions. 
And  if  I  am  to  be  represented  in  the  public  papers  as  illiberal,  and  uncharita- 
ble, because  I  endeavored  to  expose  tlie  claims  and  pretensions  of  those,  who 
hold  that  they  are  the  only  christians  in  the  world,  inasmuch  as  they  have 
bishops,  priests,  and  deacons,  acting  as  substitutes  for  Christ  on  earth  —  I 
must  even  bear  it,  as  1  may. 


NOTE   E. 

TENDENCIES  OF  PRELACY  ILLUSTRATED. 

That  the  tendencies  of  this  system  are  just  as  powerful  in  the  breasts  of 
Americans  when  they  come  under  its  influences,  as  in  those  of  Europeans, 
and  that  these  tendencies  are  even  now  rampant,  and  only  require  opportunity 
fully  to  develope  themselves,  will  be  too  evident  from  the  following  extract 
taken  from  "  The  Episcopal  Recorder  "  for  April,  1841 : 

"  The  Church  Record. — This  very  able  weekly  jiaper,  edited  by  Dr.  Hawks, 
is  one  of  the  most  acceptable  additions  to  our  table.  We  were  pleased  with 
the  projection  of  it,  and  we  have  been  equally  pleased  with  the  execution. 
But  even  so  thorough  and  known  a  churchman  as  Dr.  Hawks  is  not  to  be  al- 
lowed to  edit  a  paper  unless  he  shall  first  obtain  the  imprimatur  of  the  bishop 
of  his  diocese.  Other  papers  around  the  Church  Record,  'great  and  little,' 
have  been  making  war  with  it  for  a  few  weeks  past,  for  daring  to  exist,  with- 
out first  asking  proper  permission.  There  is  something  to  our  view  extreme- 
ly ridiculous,  in  thus  tacking  every  thing  that  is  to  be  done  in  a  church  upon 
the  skirts  of  the  bishop.  And  something  very  absurd  in  supposing  that  in 
our  age  and  in  our  land,  respectable  men  are  to  submit  to  this  weaving  into  a 
fringe  to  adorn  the  garments  of  another.  The  claim  on  the  one  side  is  just 
as  little  and  undignified  as  the  submission  to  it  on  the  other.  Dr.  Hawks 
says,  in  reference  to  this  claim,  '  Clergymen  thought  they  had  as  much  right 
to  publish  a  church  magazine  or  paper  as  they  had  to  publish  a  sermon  or 
book  without  episcopal  sanction.  No  one  at  the  piesent  day  thinks  of  asking 
episcopal  sanction,  in  the  writing  and  publishing  of  a  book  on  matters  con- 
nected with  the  church.'  He  would  perhaps  be  surprised  to  know,  as  a  fact 
which  we  could  tell  him,  that  a  bishop  in  our  time  has  called  upon  a  presby- 
ter who  published  a  book  without  his  previous  consent,  to  remonstrate  with 
him  upon  the  official  disrespect  involved  in  such  an  act,  with  the  assertion  that 
'no  clergyman  in  his  diocese  had  a  right  to  publish  a  book  without  first 
gaining  the  consent  of  his  bishop.'  How  can  respectable  persons  around  us 
feel  any  thing  but  disgust  and  contempt  at  these  unwarrantable  claims  in 
soma  of  the  officers  of  our  church !     We  wish  it  to  be  distinctly  understood, 


NOTES   TO    LECTURE    XIII.  343 

that  while  in  personal  intercourse  with  our  diocesan,  we  have  for  years  met 
with  no  other  than  the  most  liberal  and  gentlemanly  deportment,  entitling 
him  to,  and  securing  to  him,  unilbrin  personal  and  official  respect,  the  idea  of 
applying  for  episcopal  sanction  to  our  paper,  as  furnishing  authority  for  its 
instructions,  wo  should  consider  extremely  derogatory  to  our  own  character 
and  riglits,  and  are  sure  would  be  regarded  by  him  as  a  conception  of  authori- 
ty in  him,  both  undue  and  inexpedient  " 

Truly  Alarmins:. — From  the  last  C/nirchman,  which  has  reached  us,  says 
"The  Presbyterian,"  we  cut  the  following  paragraph: 

"  VVliat  can  the  orthodox  members  of  the  Greek  church  think  of  the  ortho- 
doxy of  our  church,  when  they  see  its  clergy,  resident  among  them,  freely 
intermingle  religious  services  at  prayer-meetings,  ttc,  with  these  'half  neolo- 
gical  '  teachers  from  New  England  ?  Of  wliat  use  is  it  to  talk  of  recognizing 
the  *  episcopal  principle  in  our  mission  to  the  East,  when  our  missionaries 
show  most  unequivocally  that  they  do  not  regard  it?" 

"  A  clergyman  of  the  Church  of  England,  says  the  Rev.  Mr.  Cheever,  being 
on  heathen  ground,  proposed  attending  a  prayer-meeting  held  by  the  mission- 
aries of  the  American  Board.  He  was  threatened  by  another  episcopal  cler- 
gyman, though  not  of  the  Church  of  England,  but  of  this  country,  and  it 
would  seem  outrunning  even  his  brother  of  the  establishment  in  the  compre- 
hensive energy  and  despotic  consistency  of  high-church  principles,  that  if  he 
did  dare  attend  the  unhallowed  conventicle,  he  should  be  complained  of  to 
the  established  authorities  of  his  mollier  church.  Rather  than  make  difficul- 
ty, the  divinely-ordained  servant  of  the  establishment,  induced  by  the  incon- 
sistent spirit  of  liberality  and  lowliness,  submissively  repressed  his  yearnings 
after  communion  with  his  missionary  praying  brethren,  and  inasmuch  as  that 
was  all  that  an  establishment  could  there  do  to  show  its  superiority,  or  to 
maintain  the  exclusive  divine  right  and  dignity  of  episcopal  ordination,  left 
the  unanointed  missionaries  to  pray  alone  !  Poor,  forlorn,  proscribed  disciples  ! 
Had  it  been  a  little  earlier  in  the  world's  history,  instead  of  quietly  pursuing 
your  holy  work,  with  silent  pity  for  the  arrogant  assumptions  of  your  brethren, 
and  the  exhibition  of  a  spirit  so  inconsistent  with  the  business  of  the  world's 
conversion,  you  would  have  expiated  your  offence  perhaps  within  the  walls  of 
a  prison!  In  the  good  providence  of  God,  it  is  mainly  through  the  existence 
of  a  church  without  an  establishment  in  this  country,  that  it  has  come  to  be 
possible  for  a  society  of  christians  not  only  to  pray  alone  and  unmolested  any 
where,  but  even  to  be  honored  and  revered  of  men,  and  sanctioned  and  glori- 
fied in  the  descent  of  the  Divine  Spirit,  though  entitled,  and  unsanctioned, 
either  by  the  seal  of  pope  or  bishop,  king  or  queen." 

"  What  could  be  supposed,  as  to  the  prospect  of  the  world's  evangelization,  if 
the  spirit  of  the  gospel,  instead  of  being  that  free,  unshackled,  benevolent, 
ethereal  essence  that  it  is,  had  been  the  narrow,  proud,  exclusive,  dictatorial, 
persecuting,  papistical  spirit,  that  constitutes  the  essence  of  a  prelatical,  and, 
— in  reference  to  the  war  it  has  waaed  against  all  sects  not  within  its  own 
bosom.  I  had  almost  said — piratical  establishment!  To  convert  this  world 
unto  Christ,  a  religion  is  needed,  not  of  forms  and  ceremonies,  arrogant  as- 
sumptions and  titles,  but  a  religion  of  humility,  meekness,  and  love;  a  relig- 
ion that  can,  if  need  be,  become  all  things  to  all  men,  and  not  a  religion 
which,  even  on  heathen  ground,  would  rather  part  with  the  spirit  of  the  gospel 
itself,  than  relinquish  a  solitary  jot  of  its  unhallowed,  haughty,  bigoted  pre- 
tensions." 

On  this  subject  our  missionaries  could  tell  many  tales,  which  would  not  a 
little  startle  many  unbelievers  in  the  spirit  and  tendency  of  the  system. 

in  his  recent  letters  on  India,  (Lond.  1840,)  the  Rev.  William  Buyers,  mis- 
sionary at  Benares,  (p.  194.)  thus  speaks  of  Daniel  Wilson,  bishop  of  Calcutta  : 
"  His  policy  has  given  satisfaction  to  no  party.  A  continual  and  imprudent 
intermeddling  with  things  scarcely  within  his  province,  and  undisguised  at- 
tempts to  extend  in  every  way  the  power  and  prerogatives  of  liis  office,  and 
that  sometimes  in  affairs  too  trifling  and  secular  to  be  creditable  to  him,  and  a 
harsh  and  assuming  carriage  towards  his  clergy,  especially  missionaries,  seem 
to  have  made  him  more  or  less  obnoxious  to  all  parties,  whether  clergy  or  lay- 
men."   In  reference  to  his  representations  as  to  the  other  missionaries,  the  au- 


344  NOTES    TO    LECTURE    XIII. 

thor  says  :  '  But  most  certainly  he  had  no  ground  to  impeach  the  conduct  and 
motives  of  all  sects  arid  parties.  When  called  upon,  he  explained  away  part 
of  what  he  had  said  ;  but,  though  challenged  to  the  proof  of  his  charges,  noth- 
ing like  an  amende  honornhle,  nor  an  attempt  to  substantiate  his  statements, 
could  be  obtained.  He  seemed  to  think,  that  being  a  bishop  possessing  power 
to  reprove  and  correct  his  own  clergy  publicly,  conferred  on  him  a  right  of  li- 
belling others,  without  any  one  having  a  correspondent  right  to  call  him  to  ac- 
count. The  Calcutta  missionaries  thought  otherwise  ;  and  the  collision  pro- 
duced by  his  unaccountable  course  occasioned  much  alienation  of  feeling." 
( p.  196.)  "  It  has  been  the  misfortune  of  England  that  she  never  has  had  any 
but  sectarian  bishops,"'  (  p.  197,)  infusing  into  her  a  narrow  sensitiveness  and 
insulting  jealousy  of  those  who  certainly  differ  from  her  in  externals,  but  who 
have  the  most  cordial  love  for  all  good  men  in  her  communion."  "  Dr.  Wil- 
son with  all  his  excellences  has  in  one  way  or  another  greatly  increased  the 
spirit  of  sectarianism  in  India.  Churchmen  have  been  taught  to  regard  dis- 
senters as  radicals  and  bugbears."  "  Some  of  the  chaplains  have  lately  be- 
come quite  enamored  of  the  semi-popery  of  the  Oxford  tracts,  and  though 
formerly  members  of  the  Bible  and  other  committees,  have  refused  to  sit  on 
such,  because  there  were  dissenters  on  them.  At  stations  where  there  was  no 
attempt  to  form  any  dissenting  church,  some  of  them  have  delivered  violent 
harangues  about  tithes,  church  rates,  and  the  danger  of  dissent  —  things  un- 
known in  India."  (p.  198.  See  the  whole  Letter  on  the  India  Church  Estab- 
lishment.) Such  are  the  awful  consequences,  threatening,  even  in  our  mis- 
sionary stations,  discord,  alienation  and  strife,  among  those  who  have  been 
sent  forth  to  proclaim  the  peace,  union  and  charity  of  the  gospel.  See  also 
Note  F. 


NOTE    F. 

As  facts  speak  louder  than  words,  so  nothing  could  more  palpably  demon- 
strate the  tendencies  and  yearnings  of  prelacy,  than  the  character  of  its  saints. 
Now  there  are  no  names  more  frequently  introduced  by  modern  high-church- 
men, or  with  greater  reverence  and  honor,  than  those  of  King  Charles  and 
Archbishop  Laud.  They  have  both  been  canonized,  and  deemed  worthy  of  all 
praise.  (See  on  this  Lecture,  passim,  "  The  Cathedral,"  "Lyra  Apostolica," 
and  the  Oxford  writers,  passim.) 

Mr.  Froude  thus  records  his  sentiments :  "  I  have  been  reading  Clarendon  ; 
I  am  glad  I  know  something  of  the  Puritans,  as  it  gives  me  a  better  right  to 
hate  Milton,  and  account  for  many  things  which  most  disgusted  me  in  his, 
not  in  my  sense  of  the  word,  poetry.  Also,  I  adore  King  Charles  and  Bishop 
Lmid;"  to  which  the  whole  party  cheerfully  respond,  amen!  "As  to 
the  reformers,  1  think  worse  and  worse  of  them.  Jewell  was  what  yon  would, 
in  these  days,  call  an  irreverent  dissenter.  His  defence  of  the  Apology  disgust- 
ed me  more  than  almost  any  work  I  have  read." 

False  stntements  have  also  been  published  by  his  defenders,  in  order  to  sus- 
tain his  character.  See  the  Lond.  Chr.  Obs.  1841,  p.  1G3,  &c.,  where  will  be 
found  a  very  elaborate  article  on  his  history. 

Mr.  Bristed,  an  episcopalian,  in  his  "  Thoughts  on  the  Anglican  and  Amer- 
ican-Anglo Churches,"  (N.  York,  1822,)  thus  speaks  of  Laud  :  (see  pp.  124, 
125  :  see  also  p.  12G,  &c. :)  "  And  all  these  horrible  mutilations  and  manglings 
of  his  fellow-men,  by  a  bishop  of  the  English  protestant  church  establishment ! 
For  what  ?  Because  they  were  too  honest,  too  conscientious,  too  intrepid,  to 
subscribe  to  all  his  beggarly  popish  ceremonials  and  mummery  ;  as  the  estab- 
lished, formal  substitute  for  the  worship  of  that  Jehovah,  who  is  of  purer  eyes 

than  to   behold   iniquity,   and   transgression,  and   sin." "  Laud's  own 

conduct  was  sufficient  to  ruin  any  church,  however  pure  and  apostolic  in  doc- 
trine and  worship  ;  and  to  destroy  a  much  better  king  than  Charles;  and  to 
overthrow  a  much  better  government  than  England  ever  knew,  prior  to  the 
revolution  of  ] 088.  This  semi-papist  was  continually  urging  Charles  to  the 
commission  of  illejral,  arbitrary,  cruel  acts.  Many  Puritans  were  fined  in  the 
star-chamber,  so  excessively,  as  to  sink  them  from  affluence  to  beggary." 


NOTES    TO    LECTURE    XHI.  345 

"  The  present  semi-popish  Oxford  system,  began  to  advance  in  the  reign  of 
James  I.  and  in  the  next  reign,  chiefly  under  tlie  influence  of  Archbishop 
Laud,  the  leaven  was  widely  spread,  till  church  and  state  iell  t'>gelher." 
Lond   Chr.  Obs.  Oct.  1840,  p.  588. 

Let  episcopalians  turn  to  tiie  accounts  given  of  Laud  by  the  Rev.  Benjamin 
Allen,  rector  of  St.  Paul's  church,  Philadelphia,  in  his  first  letter  to  Bishop 
Hobnrt.     (Philad.  18-27,  p   21,  &c  ) 

"  In  a  recent  number  of  the  British  Magazine,"  says  the  Lond.  Evang.  Mag. 
"  a  sonneteering  Puseyite,  gives  the  following  character  of  their  mighty  cham- 
pion,— 

"  Martyred  f.ithcr,  holiest  man, 
Luud,  our  England's  Cyprian." 

[British  Magazine,  Dec.  1840. 

"  It  seems  strange  that  any  person  having  the  slightest  knowledge  of  history, 
should  venture  to  speak  in  such  terms  as  these,  of  a  man  whose  memory  is 
infamous.  It  would  be  needless  to  enlarge  on  Laud  s  atrocious  persecution  of 
the  Puritans,  whom  he  delighted  to  torture  and  mutilate.  But  what  will  your 
readers  tliink  of  the  following  notice  in  his  own  diary.  (Nov.  IG^^d,)  of  the  pun- 
ishment inflicted  on  Leigliton,  a  Scotch  divine,  and  i'ather  of  the  celebrated 
archbishop  :  — '  Friday,  JN'ov.  IG,  part  of  his  sentence  was  executed  upon  him 
in  this  manner,  in  the  new  palace  at  Westminster,  in  term  time.  —  1.  He  was 
severely  whipped  before  he  was  put  in  the  pillory;  2.  Being  set  in  the  pillory, 
he  had  one  of  his  ears  cut  off";  3.  One  side  of  his  nose  slit ;  4.  Branded  on  one 
cheek  with  a  red-hot  iron,  with  the  letters  SS ;  and  on  that  day  sevennight, 
his  sores  upon  his  back,  ear,  nose,  and  face,  being  not  cured,  he  was  whipped 
again  at  the  pillory  in  Cheapside,  and  there  had  tlie  remainder  of  his  sentence 
executed  upon  iiim,  by  cutting  otF  the  other  ear,  splitting  the  other  side  of  the 
nose,  and  branding  the  cheek.'  This,  be  it  observed,  is  Laud's  own  testimony. 
What  must  have  been  the  state  of  that  man's  heart,  wiio  could  not  only  insti- 
gate the  government  to  perpetrate  such  barbarities,  but  could  record  them 
minutely,  and  with  evident  satisfaction,  in  his  own  private  diary  !  Bonner 
himself  was  here  '  out-heroded '  in  refinement  of  cruelty.  Leighton  was 
released,  after  ten  years'  captivity,  by  the  Long  Parliament,  having  by  that 
time  lost  his  sight,  his  hearing,  and  tiie  use  of  his  limbs.  See  '  Lives  of  Emi- 
nent British  Statesmen,'  by  Sir  James  Mackintosh,  and  John  Forster,  Esq.  of 
the  Inner  Temple,  vol.  ii.  (Earl  of  Strafford.) 

"  The  Oxford  advocates  of  the  via  media,  tell  us,  that  '  the  great  archbish- 
op '  was  profoundly  learned  in  the  ancient  discipline  and  traditions  of  the 
church,  and  has  left  an  example  worthy  of  all  imitation  by  his  successors  at 
Lambeth.  Ye  nonconformist  divines,  of  every  sect  and  denomination,  see 
what  you  have  to  expect,  s'  ould  the  Reverend  Dr.  Pusey  become  the  primate 
of  all  England  !  Think  of  poor  Leighton,  and  prepare  to  have  the  wholesome 
discipline  of  the  ancient  church  administi-rcd  for  your  benefit !  The  poets  of 
the  British  Magazine  would  then  probably  give  vent  to  their  exultation  and 
phrenzy,  in  some  such  strains  as  the  following  :  — 

'  Vilo  scliismatir:s,  impious  men. 
Worthy  of  the  lion's  den  ! 

Crop  llieir  ears,  and  slit  tlieirnoses  / 

As  the  hilly  Luud  propo-es  : 
Then  their  clunks  with  iron  brand, 
And  let  them  in  the  pill'ry  stand  ! ' 

"  Should  any  of  your  readers  think  that  I  am  treating  a  grave  subject  with 
unbecoming  levity,  I  beg  to  remind  them  of  the  following  observiition  of  liie 
great  Dr.  Isaac  Barrow  :  "  Facetiousness  is  allowable,  when  it  is  the  most 
proper  instrument  (;f  exposing  tilings  apparently  base  and  vile  to  due  con- 
tempt. When  to  impugn  them  with  downright  reason,  or  to  check  them  by 
serious  discourse,  would  signity  notliiniT  ;  then  representing  thein  in  a  shape 
strangelv  ugly  to  the  fancy,  and  tiiereby  raismg  the  derision  at  them,  may 
efTectually  discountenance  them." 

'•  The  Earl  of  Strafli'ord  was  Laud's  confidential  friend  and  correspondent. 
It  is  quite  curious  to  observe  how  the  devout  archbishop  could  unbend  when 

44 


7tw 


tidiEi  t6  LEcfuRii  iiti. 


writing  to  his  favorite  ;  nnd  I  should  like  1o  know  how  his  disciples  at  Oxford 
will  justify  his  shocking  violation  of  the  third  commandment,  in  the  following 
extracts  from  his  h-ltcrs  to  Stratford  :  '  Now  you  are  merry  again.  God  hold 
it.  And  what.'  Dr.  Palmer  acted  like  a  king,'  &c.  '  As  for  Bishop  How- 
land,  you  never  heard  of  him.  What!  nor  of  Jeanes,  his  wife,  neither? 
Good  Lord,  how  ignorant  you  can  be  when  you  list  !'  '  Vou  have  a  great 
deal  of  honor  here  for  your  proceeding.<.  Go  on,  a  God's  name.'  (The  Straf- 
ford Papers,  vol.  i.  pp.  ]70 — 329)  So  much  for  Laud's  holiness.  ]  suspect 
that  the  Tractarians  will  take  some  time  to  digest  these  precious  fragments  of 
their  great  apostle.  But  1  have  not  quite  done  with  him  yet.  As  we  are  in- 
vestigating his  claims  to  the  title  of  '  holiest  man,'  I  make  no  apolonfy  for  in- 
troducing the  following  sentences  from  Mr.  Forster's  volume,  already  referred 
to:  — '  Lord  Strafford,'  he  says,  '  was  a  man  of  intrigue,  and  tiie  mention  of 
this  is  not  to  be  avoided  in  such  a  view  of  the  bearings  of  his  conduct  and 
character  as  it  has  been  here  attempted,  for  the  first  time,  to  convey ...  .Fidel- 
ity to  the  marriage  bed  is  not  apt  to  be  most  prevalent  where  leisure  and  lux- 
ury must  abound,  &c.  Lady  Carlisle,  one  of  his  favorites,'  &c.  It  appears, 
then,  that  Lord  Straff  .rd  was  jruilty  of  h.ibitual  adultery  ;  and  yet  his  friend, 
'  the  great  archbishop,'  though  in  constant  communication  with  him,  never 
rebuked  him  for  his  sin  !  On  the  contrary,  he  frequently  addt-esses  him  in 
terms  of  vulgar  flippancy,  and  sets  him  an  e.vample  of  profane  swearing,  by  a 
most  irreverent  use  of  God's  holy  name.  And  this  is  the  man  on  whom  the 
Oxford  magi  gaze  with  transport,  as  the  brightest  luminary  of  the  Anglican 
church ! 

"  On  one  occasion,  Strafford  thus  writes  to  the  apostolical  pi-elate  :  '  I  met 
with  a  very  shrewd  rebuke  the  other  day;  for,  standinir  to  get  a  shot  at  a  buck, 
I  was  so  damnably  bitten  with  midges,  as  my  face  is  all  mezzh^d  over  ever 
since.'  In  another  letter,  Mr.  Forster  observes,  '  is  language  which  it  would 
be  a  great  outrage  of  decency  to  quote.  The  archbishop  appears  to  have  rcl- 
ishr-d  it  exceedingly.'     (Strafford  Papers,  vol.  i.  p.  1.55.; 

"  I  trust  that  enough  lias  been  said  to  prove  that  the  title  bestowed  on  Laud 
by  the  poetical  correspondent  of  the  British  Magazine  is,  to  the  last  degree, 
preposterous. 

"  In  one  respect,  it  is  a  happy  circumstance  that  the  Puseyites  have  fixed  on 
'  the  great  archbishop  '  as  the  object  of  their  fond  idolatry,  as  their  guiile,  their 
champion,  and  exemplar.  This  fact  speaks  volumes.  It  stamps  the  charact(?r 
of  the  whole  sect,  and  shows  their  ignorance  of  true  evangelical  holiness.  It 
proves  al.so  how  unworthy  they  arc  of  our  confidence.  They  studiously  sup- 
press whatever  would  tell  against  their  favorite  authors;  and.  if  they  can  give 
such  a  false  character  to  Laud,  who  lived  two  centuries  ago,  we  may  expect 
that  they  will  be  equally  dishonest  in  their  account  of  the  primitive  fathers. 
It  is  my  firm  belief  that  their  whole  system  will  one  day  crumble  to  pieces.  It 
has  no  foundation  in  truth,  and  its  downfall  is  inevitable." 


LECTURE  XIV. 


THE     PRELATICAL     DOCTRINE     OF     APOSTOLICAL     SUCCESSION 
Upip.EASONABLE. 

The  primiiive  bishops,  who  were,  both  as  it  regards  order  of 
time  and  reseipblance  in  character,  tlie  successors  of  the  apos- 
tles ia  their  ordinary  ministerial  character ;  presumed  not,  as  we 
have  seen,  to  assume  to  themselves  the  title  of  apostles.  No 
other  official  distinction  was  then  allowed  among  the  officers  of 
the  church,  beyond  that  of  bishop,  presbyter,  and  deacon  ;  or 
the  bishop,  elder,  and  deacon,  of  the  presbyterian  church.  Ihe 
terras  priest,  vicar,  mediator,  prelate,  or  successor  of  the  apos- 
tles, were  then  unknown,  and  they  were  avoided,  bec^Hse  they: 
use  would  have  been  thought  indecent.' 

Far  different,  however,  is  the  case  now.  Now,  it  is  not  only 
thought  "  decent "  to  assume  these  titles,  but  they  are  clung  to 
yvith  all  that  tenacity,  which  is  a  sure  indication  of  the  groundless- 
ness of  the  claim  by  which  they  are  asserted. «  As  the  reigning 
prince  in  Madagascar  must,  in  order  to  prove  his  right  to  the 
crown,  trace  up  his  descent  to  Ralambo,  the  father  of  the  pres- 
ent race  of  princes  f  so  to  sit  upon  the  throne  of  the  christian 
ministry,  the  test  of  validity  is  novv  made  to  depend   upon   the 

1)  See  Hind's  Rise  and  Progress  "  Now,  kind  reader,  who  do  you 
of  Ciirist.  vol.  ii.  pp.  151,  152.  suppose  is  the  ecclesiastical  cliirf,  to 

2)  "  '  Our  Ecclesiastical  Chief.'  "  whose  marshalling  and  control  the 
—  The  following  sentence  is  from  the  episcopal  clergy  of  Ohio  are  thus 
Western  Episcopal  Observer  :  '  It  will  subject  ?  To  whose  guidance,  think 
be  cheering  to  our  ecclesiastical  chief  you,  do  they  thus  boastingly  submit  r 
to  know  that  he  has  clergy  who  are  Perhaps  you  might  answer,  Jesus 
not  disposed  to  follow  hfm  afar  off,  Christ.'  Verily,  yon  would  be  mista- 
but  ready  with  the  help  of  the  Lord,  ken.  It  is  Bishop  Mcllvaine."  Bap. 
and  according   to    their    measure    of  Recorder. 

strength,  to  sustain  him,'  &.c.  3)  Ellis's  Madagascar, vol  i.  p.246. 


348 


THE    THREE   PRELATICAL   CASTES. 


[lECT.  XIV. 


correctness  of  the  incumbent's  genealogical  succession  from  the 
apostles.' 

There  nre,  we  are  assured,  three  distinct  castes  of  ministers,  as 
separate  in  nnluie.  offices,  dignity,  and  gifts,  as  the  castes  of  the 
Hindoos.  These  are  prehites,  presbyters,  and  deacons;  the  first 
the  sacred  caste,  and  the  others  the  servile  ;  the  first  appointed 
to  be  the  dignified  re|)osilorIes  of  divine  grace,  the  others  to  min- 
ister, and  to  be  in  subjection,  to  their  wili.'^  "  The  plenitude  of 
power  which  Is  communicated  to  inferior  ministers  by  parts," 
says  Archbishop  Potter,^  "  according  to  their  respective  orders, 
is  wholly  and  altogether  lodged  in  the  bishop."  "  Every  bishop 
is  supreme  in  his  own  diocese,  and  subject  to  none  but 
Christ ;  while  every  member  must  be  subject  to  his  bishop 
who  presides  over  him  with  the  plenitude  of  episcopal 
authority  ;"*  and  as  "  having  power  to  inflict  punishment 
ON  THOSE  WHO  REFUSE  TO  OBEY  HiM."^  By  hIs  mystcrlous 
gifts,  the  other  orders  are  made  capableof  communicating  grace, 
and  are  empowered  to  preach  and  to  baptize  —  so  that  without 
him,  there  could  be  no  church,  no  ministers,  no  sacraments,  and, 
therefore,  no  covenanted  salvation.  Now,  every  bishop  in  the 
world,  as  we  are  told,  succeeds  to  Peter,  or  some  other  apostle, 
and  has  the  same  station  and  authority  within  his  own  diocese, 
which  our  Lord  conferred  upon  Peter.**  This  power  of  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  "  by  which  alone  they  are  made  governors  of  his 


1)  "  I  am  thus  emphatically  taught," 
says  the  Rev.  Mr.  Pratt,  (Old  Paths,  p. 
128,)  '  tliat  the  efficacy  of  tlie  chris- 
tian minister's  official  acts,  depends 
entirely  on  the  commission  which  he 
holds  from  Christ,  and  not,  as  the 
lantruage  and  practice  of  multitudes 
would  lead   one    to    suppose,   on  his 

OWN  PKRSONAL  CHARACTER  AND  QUAL- 
IFICATIONS.      MV    UUTV,    THKREFORE, 

is  TO  OBFY  them  that  have  the  rule 
over  me  in  the  Lord  ;  and  I  no  where 
read,  that  this  duty  is  to  be  relaxed  on 
account  of  the  laults  of  the  minister. 
He  could  scarcely  omit  the  reading 
of  the  (ordinary  .services,  and  at  the 
stated  seasons  the  dispensing  of  the 
means  of  grace  ;  and  were  he  so  neg- 
lifirent,  his  bishop  would  in  all  proha- 
hiliiij,  adopt  means  either  to  have  the 
abuse  corrected,  or  the  unfaithful 
pastor  suspended  from  his  sacred 
charge."  This  truly  is  passive  obe- 
dience in  spiritual  tilings. 

The  absurdity  of  this  theory  is  thus 
ehown  by  Dr.  Rice,  (Evang.  Mag. 
vol.  X.  p.  29.)  "  Let  us  suppose," 
/says  he,  "  that  after  the  lapse  of  twen- 


ty centuries,  and  a  thousand  changes 
in  this  country,  the  constitution  of 
the  United  States  should  be  preserved 
without  corruption,  and  the  people  of 
that  future  age  should  elect  a  presi- 
dent according  to  tiie  mode  prescribed 
in  that  sacred  instrument,  could  they 
not  determine  whether  he  were  duly 
authorized  to  administer  the  affairs 
of  the  nation,  without  going  back 
through  every  age,  and  ascertaining 
whether  the  ruler  of  tlie  country  had 
been  duly  elected,  and  the  chief  jus- 
tice, who  administered  the  oath  of 
office,  duly  appointed  in  every  case.-* 
And  does  the  president  derive  his 
authority  from  the  chief  justice,  who 
officiates  at  his  inauguration  .^  " 

2)  See  the  Sum  of  the  Episco- 
pal Controversy,  William  Jameson, 
(Jlasg.  17]:5,  ed.  2nd,  p.  3,  and  his 
Cyprianus  Isotiirius,  ch.  i.  where  this 
is  fully  established. 

3)  On  Ch.  Gov.  p.  206. 

4)  See  ibid,  pp.  Ib2,  183. 

5)  Potter  on  Ch.  Gov.  p.  214. 

6)  See  ibid,  p.  183. 


LECT.  XIV.]     THIS  THEORY  THE  SOUUCE  OF  ALL  INTOLERANCE. 


349 


church,'"  is  derived  to  this  peculiar  class,  in  exclusion  of  all 
others,  by  an  unbroken  line  of  personal,  lineal  successors.  All 
others  who  pretend  to  the  authority  of  christian  ministers  or 
churches  are,  ijjso  facto,  rebels  against  God  ;  traitors  against  his 
law  and  government ;  schismatics;  heretics;  totally  separate  from 
the  church  of  Christ ;  and  beyond  the  pale  of  covenanted  salva- 
tion. This  fact,  which  is  true  of  all  protestant  communions  — 
lutherans,  inethodists,  and  sectarians  in  general  —  is  especially 
true,  and  in  its  weightiest  sentence  of  guilt  and  misery,  of  pres- 
byterians.2 

Such  is  the  doctrine  of  the  prelatical  apostolical  succession, 
which  we  have  at  some  length  considered.  We  have  brought 
it  to  the  test  of  scripture  and  of  historical  evidence,  and  found  it 
to  be  teJ{:eI,  and  utterl)'  groundless  and  absurd.  And  we  have 
shown,  also,  that  it  stands  convicted  of  a  tendency  to  popery, 
and  the  extremest  intolerance.  It  constitutes  the  very  pivot  on 
which  has  moved  the  whole  apparatus  of  ecclesiastical  tyranny 
—  that  ecclesiastical  law  by  which  every  system  of  oppression 
has  been  supported — and  by  whose  undoubted  truth,  the  extrem- 
est exercise  of  the  most  baibarous  and  exterminating  cruelty  has 
not  only  been  justified,  but  approved  as  merciful  to  man  and  glo- 
rifying to  God.     What  were  the  sacrifice  of  a  million  lives, 

"  If  o'er  it  lay  the  way  to  lift  the  throne 
Of  apostolic  power,  and  fix  the  rock 
On  which  the  eternal  church  was  built?" 


1)  Ibid,  p.  184. 

2)  Mr.  Bristed,  counsellor  at  law, 
and  an  episcopalian,  in  his  "  Thoughts 
on  the  Anglican  and  Anglo-American 
Churches,"  (N.York,  ]822,  pp.  416, 
418,)  thus  speaks  of  this  doctrine: 
"  The  doctrine  of  cxclusice  church- 
manship  ;  that  is  to  say,  the  assump- 
tion of  all  covenant  claim  to  the  mer- 
cy of  God  in  Christ  Jesus  being 
confined  to  episcopalians,  is  strenu- 
ously avowed  hy  many  writers,  on 
both  sides  of  the  Atlantic. 

"  This  exclusive  churchmanship,  in 
sober  christian  verity,  is  a  doctrine, 
which  may  possibly  be  enforced  with 
tl)e  gallows  for  its  second,  and  the 
dungeon  for  its  bottle-holder,  as  in 
papal  Rome  under  the  benignant 
auspices  of  Hildebrand,  and  as  in 
England,  under  the  sovereignty  of 
tlie  arbitrary  Tudors,  and  the  domin- 
ion of  the  execrable  Stuarts.  But  in 
these  United  States,  whose  political 
institutions  permit  to  all  persons  free 
access  to  the  Bible ;  and  where  no 
one  is  punished  hy  law  for  believing 


what  God  says  in  his  own  revealed 
word  ;  very  i'liw  theologians  will  be 
found  with  a  gorge  sufficiently  capa- 
cious to  swallow  these  dirtiest  of  all 
the  dregs  of  popery."  '•  Peradven- 
ture,  Stillingfleet  and  Leighton,  not 
now  to  mention  a  thousand  other  dis- 
tinguished champions  of  the  Anglican 
church,  had  examined  this  matter  as 
conscientiously,  and  had  brought  ta 
bear  upon  the  subject  as  much  genu- 
ine piety,  real  talent,  and  stmnd 
learning, as  have  been  mustered  upon 
the  same  occasion,  by  any  of  the  mod- 
ern cliampions  of  tills  popish  plea, 
and  yet  tliey  shrunk  with  horror  from 
the  impious  insolence  of  wMcovenant- 
ing,  MTjchurching  the  numberless  mil- 
lions of  non-episcopalians,  who  have 
ever  breathed  upon  earth  " 

-'There  are  not,  then,  more  than 
two  hundred  and  fifty  thousand 
churchmen  in  the  United  States  ;  and 
these  quarter  of  a  million  of  episcopa- 
lians are  the  only  covenant  people  of 
God  out  of  an  American  population 
exceeding  ten  millions  I !  ' 


350  PRELACY    WITHERS    Uf    COJVIPASSJQN.  [l.^??-  Jf-^Y- 

There  being  but  one  church,  and  there  being  eoverjanted  sol- 
vation only  tlirough  its  ministrations,  and  their  efficacy  being  de- 
pendent on  this  transmitted  power  of  apostohc  right,  of  course, 
whate^'cr  opposes  this  must  be  from  Satanic  agency,  and  r^sist^enj, 
tljerefore,  evea  unto  blood,  that 

"  this  vast  body- 
May  bespread  the  world,  uncliecked,  and  unopposed, 
Jjike  God's  own  presence,  every  where  displayed  — 
An  undivided  empire,  governing 
The  universal  mind  of  man." 

This  principle  once  admitted  into  the  heart  —  and  it  is  the 
very  soul  of  prelacy  — one  church,  one  apostolic  succession,  and 
but  one  way  of  covenanted  salvation — and  in  proportion  to  the 
enthusiasm  of  him  in  whom  it  operates,  will  it  lead  to  that  "  un- 
questioning devotion,"  which  will  pursue  the  interest  Off  the 
church  at  every  hazard,  and  at  every  sacrifice.  These  feelings 
are  well  and  truly  represented  by  Mr.  Milman  io  the  character 
of  his  Angelo,'  as  given  by  Angelo  himself. 

"  A  noble  born 
Of  Rome's  patrician  blood,  rich,  lettered,  versed 
In  the  affnirs  of  men  ;  no  monkish  dreumrr 
Hearing  Heaven's  summons  in  ecstatic  vision. 
God  spake  within  this  heart,  but  with  the  voice 
Of  stern  deliberate  duty,  and  1  rose, 
Resolved  to  sail  the  flood,  to  tread  the  fire  — 
That's  naught  —  to  quench  all  natural  compunction, 
To  know  nor  riglit  nor  v\'rong,  nor  crime  nor  virtue. 
But  as  subservient  to  Rome's  cause  and  Heaven's. 
I've  school'd  my  hauglity  soul  to  subtlest  craft, 
I've  strung  my  tender  heart  to  bloodiest  havoc. 
And  stand  prepar'd  to  wear  the  martyr's  flames. 
Like  nuptial  robes;  —  far  worse,  to  drag  to  the  stake 
My  friend,  the  brother  of  my  soul  —  if  thus 
I  gear  the  hydra  heads  of  heresy." 

That  such  is  the  necessary  tendency  of  this  doctrine,  and 
that  it  is  therefore  unchristian,  and  in  utter  repugnance  to  the 
genius  of  republicanism,  and  of  civil  and  religious  liberty;  must 
be  admitted,  on  the  evidence  of  its  whole  past  history,  wherever 
it  was  allowed  free  scope  to  divulge  its  inherent  tendencies. 

That  it  is  so  regarded  by  any  of  its  abettors,  in  this  coun- 
try—  and  they  are,  we  fear,  not  a  few  —  we  are  far  from  as- 
serting. Rather  do  we  believe,  that,  in  giving  it  their  counte- 
nance, tiiey  know  not  what  they  do  ;  or  that  they  hope,  and 
believe,  that  it  may  be  made  to  accommodate  itself  to  the  en- 
liffhienment,  and  liberalliy  of  our  times.  But  founded  as  it  ip, 
in  alliance  with  the  despotism  of  ages  —  drawing  its  very  nutri- 

1)  In  his  Anne  Boleyn.     See  Wks.  vol.  iii.  p.  35.     See  the  whole  passage. 


i8«T.  iiV.]  THiS  fldd^nmB  unreasonable.  381 

ment  from  the  Hiatefnal  bfeast  of  the  ancient  chilrch — living  in 
her  life,  and  therefore,  naturally  jealous  of  her  character,  and 
tender  towards  her  abominations j  —  thus  necessarily  imbu- 
iiiir  the  whole  soul  with  the  spirit  of  subjection,  and  an  inward 
reverence  for  the  idea  of  linity,  and  of  a  governing  and  presi- 
ding head— and  containing  within  it  an  aristocracy,  already  sur- 
rounded by  all  the  claims  of  divine  antiquity,  and  ancestral 
glory  — ^vve  cannot  but  regard  it,  with  the  late  Dr*  Rice,  as  in 
violent  contrast  to  our  republican  institutions. ^ 

In  presenting  the  giounds  upon  which  we  rested  our  claim  to 
an  unquestionable  scripture  authentication  of  this  doctrine  of 
apostolical  succession,  we  dwelt  upon  the  unreasonableness  of 
the  whole  scheme.''  This  consideration,  which  so  evidently 
augments  the  force  of  our  objection,  from  the  acknowledged 
want  of  a  positive  and  clear  scriptural  institution's  not  less 
strong  when  applied  to  the  merits  of  the  doctrine  at  large.  We 
would  therefore  assign  its  unreasonableness,  as  a  further  ground 
for  the  rejection  of  this  doctrine,  in  addition  to  those  which  have 
been  already  advanced.^  Without  repeating  what  has  been  said 
under  the  former  head,  we  W'ould  offer  some  further  remarks,  to 
show  that  this  doctrine  is  as  traitorous  to  reason,  as  it  is  to  civil 
and  religious  liberty.  When  we  are  gravely  invited  to  embrace 
the  offer  of  subjection  to  this  supremacy,  as  the  foundation  for 
union,  peace,  and  charity,  we  are  reminded  of  a  classic  illustra- 
tion, thus  poeticised  by  Dryden  : 

"  Methinks  such  terms  of  proffered  peace  you  bring 
As  once  jEneas  to  the  Italian  king. 
Bv  long  possession,  ail  tills  land  is  mine — 
You  strangers  come  with  your  intruding  line, 
To  share  my  sceptre  —  which  you  svvare  is  thine. 
You  plead,  like  him,  an  ancient  pedigree, 
And  claim  a  peaceful  seat  by  fate's  decree."* 

It  is  the  sublime  doctrine  of  our  confession  of  faith  — and  ex- 
pressing, in  brief  summary,  the  very  subsistence  of  all  genuine 
liberty  , —  that  "  God  alone,  is  Lord  of  the  conscience,  and  hath 
left  it  free  from  the  doctrines  and  commandments  of  men, 
which  are,  in  any  thing,  contrary  to  his  word,  or  beside  it  in  mat- 
ters of  faith  or  worship.  So  that  to  believe  such  doctrines,  or 
to  obey  such  commandments  out  of  consciencCj  is   to   betray 

1^    The    opposite    character    of  bishop  Tillotson,  when  he  declared, 

pi'esbyterianism, we  hope  to  establish  "that  it   might  well  seem  strange,  if 

in  future.  any  man  should  write  a  book  to  prove 

2)  See   Discourse    fourth,  Arg.  that  an  egg  is  not  an  elephant,  and 
seventh.  that  a  musket  itali  is  not  a  pike." 

3)  To     disprove     such    absurd  4)  The  Hind  and  Panther,  Poet'l. 
claims  as  these,  is  a  hardship  some-  Wks.  vol.  ii.  p.  118. 

thing  like  that  complained  of  by  Arch- 


352  THE    PHOVINCE    OF   REASON.  [lECT.  XIV. 

true  liberty  of  conscience  ;  and  the  requiring  an  implicit  faith, 
and  an  absolute  and  blind  obedience,  is  to  destroy  liberty  of 
conscience,  and  reason  also." 

Where  God  has  not  legislated,  and  thus  finally  decided  for 
his  church — as  he  has  in  all  points  of  necessary  doctrine  — 
reason  is  intrusted  with  a  discretionary  liberty  to  exercise  her 
powers.  Her  voice,  tvithin  her  iirovince,  is  sanctioned  by  God, 
and  no  earthly  authority  has  any  other  than  an  usurped  power 
to  inflict  penalties,  or  impose  restraints  upon  her.'  Whatever 
is  not  enjoined  as  fundamental,  and  essential  in  the  word  of 
God,  cannot  be  made  so,  without  impious  arrogance,  by  man. 

But  that  God  has  created  "  a  policied  society  "^  of  prelates, 
to  w-hom  all  places  of  honor  and  profit,  and  the  whole  plenitude 
of  authority,  jurisdiction  and  gifts,  with  the  sole  power  of  perpet- 
uating these  benefits,  are  given  ;  and  that,  too,  not  in  the  siiape 
of  a  trust,  for  which  they  may  be  held  responsible,  and  called  to 
account  by  the  other  orders,  or  by  the  laity,  but  in  the  character 
of  a  prerogative  or  supremacy,  which  may  be  exercised  at  pleas- 
ure, with  only  an  ultimate  subjection  to  Christ,  the  head  ;  —  this 
prelalical  hypothesis  is,  we  say,  without  any  solid  foundation  in 
tlie  word  of  God.  This  fact,  as  we  have  already  shown,  is  ad- 
mitted.^ It  is  expressly  declared,  that  this  claim  is  above  the 
understanding  of  all,  alike.^  But  as  the  doctrine  itself,  from 
which  such  claims  are  deduced,  is  within  the  boundaries  pre- 
scribed for  the  exercise  of  human  sagacity  and  wisdom,*  it  is 
manifestly  unreasonable  and  absurd.  To  say  that  God  cannot 
perpetuate  and  preserve  the  church,  but  through  this  succession  of 
prelates,  is  daring  impiety.  To  say  that  he  will  not  do  so,  is  to 
assume  the  very  point  in  debate,  and  to  make  void  the  word  of 
God,  where  he  has  declared  no  such  ihing.     And  to  say  that  it 

1)  See  Spirit.  Desp.  pp.122, 121.  more  meritorious  in  proportion  to  the 

2)  It  is  so  called  by  Hooker  and  objections  fell  and  silenced." 
Warburton.      See     Div.   Leg.   b.   2,  5.  That  this  question  regards   rites 
§  4.  and  ceremonies,  Mr.  Palmer  allows. 

3)  See  Lect.  iv.  Now,    that     these      come    "  within 

4)  See  Oxf.  Tr.  vol  i.  p  20.  In  the  compnss  of  human  under.stand- 
his  work  on  Tradition  Unveiled,  (pp.  ing,"  is  also  affirmed  by  Archbishop 
47,  G3,  and  pp.  07,  75.)  in  exposure  of  Potter,  (see  on  the  Ch.  p.  284,)  and 
this  new  system.  Professor  Powell,  of  may,  therefore,  be  judged  of"  by  men 
Oriel  College,  Oxford,  sayc  :  "  And  of  common  capacities."  Their  evi- 
applying  these  philosophical  princi-  dent  absurdity  is,  tiierefore,  a  sulll- 
ples  to  theology,  he  learns  that  *  an  cient  ground  for  their  rejection,  even 
intellectual,  a  reasonable  religion,  as  it  has  been  sufficient  for  the  re- 
is  a  thing  which  nullifies  itself.'  Or-  moval  of  other  customs  allowed  to 
ihodo.vy,  if  exposed  to  tiie  rude  shock  have  been  apostolical,  (see  ibid,  2.':;2.) 
cf  argument  and  t!ie  tests  of  evidence.  This  is  the  more  evident,  as  this 
■would  fall.  Rational  investigation  may  be  well  supposed  to  come  under 
leads  lo  socinianism  and  deism.  To  (p.  2i35)  the  "  many  things  ordered 
silence  inquiry  is  the  proper  way  to  by  the  first  bishops,  wliicli  are  not  ex- 
christian  belief.     P'aith  is  a  duty  ;  the  pressly  contained  in  scripture." 


LECT.  XIV.]      IT    SUBSTITUTES   THE    MEANS    FOR   THE    END.  353 

is  probable  God  would  decree  such  an  instrumentality,  is  to  af- 
firm that  to  be  probable,  which  is  in  itself  most  impossible  and 
absurd. 

The  single  end  of  the  christian  ministry,  is  the  end  of  the  min- 
istry and  priesthood  of  its  divine  Author  —  the  salvation  of  souls, ' 
and  not  the  offering  of  sacrifice"  —  or  the  infliction  of  punish- 
ment —  or  the  imposition  of  hands  —  or  the  exaltation  of  a  su- 
perior order  —  or  the  decreeing  of  rites  and  ceremonies,  and 
vain  pomps.  But  to  make  the  essential  qualification,  efficiency, 
and  validity  of  the  christian  ministry  depend  on  the  preservation 
of  this  succession,  and  not  rather  on  inward  and  spiritual  gifts  ; 
so  as  that  the  prelatical  manifestation  of  a  bishop,  is  of  more 
importance  than  the  deepest  piety  —  the  most  extensive  knowl- 
edge, and  the  best  gifts  of  oratory  and  persuasion  —  this,  as  we 
regard  it,  is  the  veriest  superstition.  This  is  to  identify  the 
forms  of  Christianity  with  Christianity  itself —  nay,  rather  to  ex- 
alt them  above  it  —  and  thus  render  the  immutable  and  imper- 
ishable soul  subordinate  to  the  changing  and  perishable  body. 
It  is  to  invvrap  that  soul  in  the  winding-sheet  of  death.  How 
can  it  be  probable  that  God  should  infallibly  entail  his  greatest 
and  best  gifts  to  a  succession  of  men,  without  any  regard,  in 
prospect,  to  their  learning,  honesty,  virtue,  or  piety  ;  and  to 
men  who  have  been,  in  fact,  many  of  them  characterized  by 
every  quality  most  disgraceful  and  criminous  ?  ^ 

This  is  to  appropriate  Christ's  commission  and  promises,  as 
does  the  anti-christian  papacy,  to  Peter  and  his  representatives, 
'•'  propagated  by  a  principle  of  succession,"''  which  inheres,  and 
of  right  attaches  to  his  body,  the  church.  This  is  to  refer  all 
grace,  and  spiritual  power,  directly  and  immediately,  to  an  or- 
der of  men,  who  may  not  even  believe  in  grace  or  spiritual  ener- 
gy at  all  f  and  not  rather  to  the  dispensation  of  Him,  who  ever 

1)  Palmer  on  the  Church,  vol.  ii.  says,  (vol.  i.  p.  48.)  "  Though  there 
p.  461.  be  a  great  deal  preached,  in  which  you 

2)  Ibid.  cannot  recognize  the  voice  of  the  Sa- 

3)  See  Jackson's  Wks.  vol.  i.  p.  viour,  and  though  the  sacraments  be 
302.  administered  by  hands  ichich  seem  im- 

4)  Oxf.  Tr.  vol.  i.  p.  4G.  pure  enough  to  sully  their  sanctity,  yet 

5)  "Why,  then,"  asks  Mr.  we  do  venture  to  assert,  that  no  man, 
Keble,  "  should  it  be  incredible,  tliat  who  keeps  Clirist  steadfastly  in  view, 
a  minister  of  God,  as  such,  may  have  as  the  minister  of  tlie  true  tabernacle, 
the  same  spirit  especially  abidintr  in  will  ever  fail  to  derive  profit  from  a 
him  as  for  all  otlier  parts  of  his  office.  sermon,  and  strength  from  a  commun- 

So  for  the  custody  of  the  good  depos-  ion The  ordained  preacher 

it,  the  fundamentals  of  doctrine  and  is  a  messenger,  a  messenger  from  the 

practice,  and  yet  be  liable  to  error,  God  of  the  whole  earth.     His  mental 

and  HEREsv,  and  APOSTACV  .' "   Prim.  capacity  maybe  weak,  —  that  is  noth- 

Trad.  p.  105.  ing.     His  speech  may  be  contemptible, 

Mr.  Melville,  whose  sermons  have  —  that  is  nothing.  His  knowledge 
been   republished    in    this    country,      may  be  circumscribed,  we  say  not, — 

45 


354  PRELATIC   AND    SCRIPTURAL   REASONING.         [LECT.  XIV. 

livetli  as  a  prince  upon  his  throne,  and  as  head  over  all  things, 
to  his  church  and  people.  God's  polity  is  to  bestow  all  gifts, 
graces,  promises,  and  ministrations,  on  his  church  and  people  — 
saying,  "  all  are  yours."  Prelatical  polity  is  to  subordinate  the 
church  and  people  of  God,  to  these  sacerdotal  functionaries,  in 
whose  grasp  God  has  left  the  destinies  of  immortal  spirits ;  and 
whose  motto  is,  "  all  things  are  ours." 

An  uncontrolled  right  to  interpret  law,  and  to  administer  and 
enforce  it,  is  "a  right  to  enslave;"  and  this  is  the  policy  of 
ecclesiastics  —  "  Be  ye  not  the  servants  of  men,"  (1  Cor.  vii.  23,) 
and  "  call  no  men  masters  on  earth,"  and  "  let  no  men  have  do- 
minion over  your  faith,"  and  "  stand  fast  in  the  liberty  wherewith 
Christ  hath  made  you  free  ;  "  this  is  the  spirit  and  the  voice  of 
the  good  shepherd,  the  bishop  of  our  souls.  Give  no  ear  to  the 
traditions  of  men,  whereby  they  would  privily  bring  you  again  into 
bondage  ;  this  is  the  exhortation  which  speaketh  unto  us  from 
forth  the  oracles  of  God.  Obey  my  statutes,  volumes  of  ecclesias- 
tical laws,  canons,  injunctions,  decrees,  rites,  orders,  ceremonies, 
days,  times,  and  seasons,  and  that  on  pain  of  spiritual  censure  ; — 
this  is  the  voice,  which,  in  the  loud  tone  of  threatening  and  ter- 
ror, calls  upon  us  to  "  hear  the  church." 

"Be  ye  in  subjection  to  the  Father  of  spirits,  and  live.  He 
that  doeth  my  commandments  and  keepeth  my  sayings,  he  it  is 
that  loveth  me  ;"  —  this  is  the  gospel  of  glad  tidings.  Obey  the 
church,  and  submit  to  her  laws,  even  when  they  are  erroneous  ;* 
and  thus  at  Rome  be  a   papist,  in  Saxony  a  lutheran,  in  Scot- 

that  is   nothing;    but    we   say,   that  suppose  the   services  of  the    church 

whatever   the  man^s   qualifications,  he  stripped  «ifflZZ  cj/icaciy,  then  by  acting 

should   rest  upon   his    office faith  on  the  head  of  the  ministry,  they 

VVe    lire   certain,    as    upon   a    truth,  are  instructed  and  nourisiied  ;  tliough 

which,  to  deny,  is  to  assault  the  foun-  in  the  main  the  given  lesson  befalse- 

dations  of  Christianity,  that  the  chief  hood,   and   the   proffered   sustenance 

minister  is  so  mindful  of  his  office,  little  better  than  poison." 
that  every  man  who  listens  in  faith,  "  According  to  this  scheme,"  says 

expecting  a  message  from  above,  shall  Mr.  Bristed,  (Thoughts,  &c.  p.  439,) 

be  addressed  through  the  mouth,  aye,  "of  exclusive    churchmanship,   also, 

even  through  the  mistahcs  and  errors  if  the  Anglican  and  American-Anglo 

of  the  inferior Jf,  whcreso-  churches  were  to  lapse  into  socinian- 

ever  the  minister  is  deficient  and  un-  ism,  they  would   still  be  true  church- 

taught,  so  that  his  sermons  exhibit  a  es  ;  and  communion   with  a  socinian 

wrong  sijsteni  of  doctrine,  yon  v,'\\\  not  bishop    would    be    communion    with 

allow    that    Christ's    church  may  be  Christ,  and  separation  from  a  socin- 

profited  Inj  the  ordinance  of  preaching,  ian  bishop  would  be   separation  from 

you  clearly  argue  that  the  Redeemer  Christ,  although  that  same  socinian 

has  given  up  his  office We  bishop    denies  the    divinity  and    the 

behold   the  true  followers  of  Christ  atonement  of  Christ,  denies  all  that 

enabled  to  find  food  in  pastures  ichich  is  essential  to,  and  characteristic  of, 

seem    barren,   and    water    where     the  the  stupendous  plan  of  christian  re- 

fountains  are  dry When  ev-  demption." 

erxj  thing  sceras  against  them,  so  that  1)  See  Dr.  Pusey's  Letter,  p.  19. 

on    a   carnal   calculation  you  would 


LECT.  XIV.]  THIS    THEORY    ENFORCES    CONTRARIETIES.  355 

land  a  presbyterian,  and  in  England,  a  diocesan  prelatist ; — this 
is  the  sure  way  of  salvation  by  the  church.'  Woe  unto  them 
that  teach  for  doctrines,  the  commandments  of  men  ; — this  is 
the  divine  anathema.  He  that  will  not,  in  all  things,  conform  to 
the  rights  and  ceremonies  which  the  church  (that  is,  her  prelates) 
have  authority  to  decree  and  impose  ;  he,  therefore,  that  in  Eng- 
land will  not  use  the  sign  of  the  cross  in  baptism,  wear  surplices, 
kneel  at  an  altar,  observe  times,  and  seasons,  and  days,  and 
months,  and  commemorate  dead  men ;  and  he,  who  at  Rome, 
will  not  use  salt  and  spittle  in  baptism,  chrism,  extreme  unction,  — 
who  will  not  use  holy  water,  holy  earth,  holy  knives  to  cut  the 
sacramental  bread,  holy  basins  and  ewers  for  the  priest  to  wash 
in  before  the  sacrament,  and  a  hundred  other  ceremonies,  let 
him  be  accursed  ;  —  this  is  the  anathema  of  the  church.^ 

This  whole  theory  we  pronounce  absurd,  because  it  is  contra- 
dictory to  the  whole  word  and  providence  of  God.  From  the 
era  of  the  creation  to  the  coming  of  Christ,  the  church  never  was 
built  on  any  men  or  order  of  men,  but  was  founded  on  the  living 
God,  who  is  above  all,  over  all,  and  independent  of  all.  And 
the  very  fact  that  there  is  no  agreement  among  its  friends,  either 
as  to  the  origination  of  the  chain,  nor  as  to  its  successive  links, 
nor  as  to  the  extent  of  power  invested  in  it,  nor  as  to  any  one 
thing  about  it,  but  its  exclusion  from  covenanted  salvation  of  all 
but  themselves,  this  is  of  itself  sufficient  to  expose  its  groundless- 
ness and  absurdity  as  a  doctrine  which  is  of  divine  right,  of  the 
substance  of  the  faith,  and  as  essential  to  the  existence  of  the 
church.^ 

This  doctrine  is  unreasonable,  further,  because  it  is  sustained 
by  the  most  false  and  sophistical  reasoning.  Wherever  the 
premises,  in  any  degree  touching  the  hierarchy,  are  to  be  laid 
down,  we  are  then  told  that  there  must  be  a  ministry  in  order  to 
the  being  of  a  church  — and  a  ministerial  succession,  in  order  to 
the  perpetuation  of  that  ministry — and  connexion  with  this 
church  as  a  necessary  condition  to  salvation.*  But  when  the 
conclusion  is  to  be  drawn,  instead   of  inferring,  as  can  only  be 

1)  See  Hanbury's  Hooker,  vol.  i.  gent  friends  are  so  much  divided 
p.  39.  about  it;  and  in  order  to  account  for 

2)  Hanbury's  Hooker,  vol.  i.  p.  it,  recur  to  hypothesis  so  contradicto- 
30.  ry  ;  a  presumption,  too,  let  me  add, 

3)  See  Powell  on  Ap.  Succ.  pp.  that  their  judgment  would  lead  them 
141,  242,  where  is  given  the  argument  soon  to  adopt  the  premises  of  their 
at  length.  adversaries,  to  which  they  sometimes 

See  Campbell's  Lectures  on  Eccl.  approach  very  near,  if  their  passions 
Hist.  vol.  i.  lect.  7.  "  It  is  a  shrewd  would  allow  them  to  admit  the  con- 
presumption,"  says  he,  (Lect.  on  Ec.  elusion." 

Hist.  lect.  vii.  p.  138,)  "  that  a  system  4)  See  e.  g.  Oif.  Tr.  vol.  i.  pp. 

is  ill  founded,  when  its  most  intelli-  44,  45,  46. 


356  SUSTAINED   BY    SOPHISTICAL   ARGDMENT.         [LECT.  XIV. 

properly  done  from  such  premises,  the  essentiahty  of  a  christian 
ministry  to  a  christian  commonwealth,  we  are  gravely  assured 
that  it  is  thus  demonstrated,  that  this  succession  can  inhere  only 
in  a  prelacy,  which  is  no  conclusion  at  all.  When  the  rights 
of  presbyters  are  to  be  overthrown,  then  are  we  told  that  all 
that  is  recorded  in  the  New  Testament  about  bishops,  overseers, 
and  so  on,  is  to  be  understood  exclusively  of  the  second  order 
of  ministers ;'  but  when  prelatic  dignity  is  to  be  asserted,  these 
same  divine  instructions  —  for  the  simple  reason  that  there  are 
no  others  —  are  to  be  understood  as  descriptive  of  prelates.^ 

When  it  is  to  be  proved  that  Christ  commissioned  apostles  as 
the  first  order  in  the  christian  ministry,  then  we  are  informed  he 
empowered  them  to  preach  and  to  baptize.^  This  was  their  duty 
and  office.  But  when  a  second  order  is  to  be  introduced,  then 
are  we  taught,  that  in  governing  and  ordaining,  lies  the  suprem- 
acy of  the  prelatic  function.  When  the  third  order  of  deacons  is 
to  be  made  out  from  the  w^ord  of  God,  then  they  are  plainly 
found  in  the  seventy  disciples,  who  were  sent  forth  to  preach,* 
and,  of  course,  to  baptize  ;  and  yet,  when  prelates  are  to  be  en- 
throned in  the  plenitude  of  their  episcopal  authority,  neither 
presbyters  (which  the  apostles  of  course  were,  when  first  com- 
missioned, otherwise  the  three  orders  fail)  nor  deacons  have  any 
right  either  to  preach  or  to  baptize,*  but  as  permitted  by  their 
prelate  f  and  the  work  and  duty  of  baptizing  is  reduced  to  an  in- 
ferior and  lower  ministry ! 

When  presbyters  are  to  be  deposed,  then  is  it  demanded  of 
us  to  show  proof,  strong  from  holy  writ,  and  which  even  a  prel- 
citist  cannot  gainsay  or  doubt,  that  they  were  authorized  to  or- 
dain.''—  But  when  prelatic  functions  are  in  debate,  then,  that 
"  it  cannot  be  proved"  —  that  "it  is  more  probable'"*  —  that 
the  early  church  thought  sc  —  and  that  civil  societies  do  so  — 
are  reasons  abundantly  sufficient  to  put  to  silence  all  objections, 
and  thus  to  make  that  which  is  admitted  to  be  doubtful,  "  fun- 
damental to  Christianity  !  "^ 

When  the  honor  of  this  succession  is  involved  in  the  decis- 
ion, then  it  is  decreed  that  the  Nicene  church,  the  Romish,  the 
Greek,  and  the  Oriental,  are  all  true  and  christian  churches, 
and  to  be  regarded  as  within  the  unity  of  the  body  of  Christ'"  — 
although  it  is  plain,  and  manifest,  and  allowed  —  that  they  held 

1)  e.  g.  Bp.  Onderdonk,  in  Wks.  6)  Ibid,  p.  230,  and  elsewhere, 
on  Episcop.  as  quoted.                                        7)  See  Bp.  Onderdonk  in  Wks. 

2)  e.  g.  Potter  on  Ch.  Gov.  p.  on   Episcopacy,  as    above,  and   Pot- 
205,  and  elsewhere.  ter,  p.  109. 

3)  e.  g.  Potter,  pp.  43,  46.  8)  Potter,  pp.  251, 253,  &c.  p.  109. 

4)  lb.  p.  46,  thrice,  and  pp.  102-  9)  Potter,  p.  249. 

104,  &c.  10)  Palmer  on  tUe  Ch.  vol.  i.  180, 

5)  Potter,  p.  238,  &.a.  «fec.  202. 


LECT.  XIV.]         SUSTAINED    BY    SOPHISTICAL   REASONING.  357 

and  enforced  tenets,  customs  and  ordinances  which  are  contrary 
to  God's  word,  and  to  all  truth  and  righteousness  ;  and  dangerous 
to  salvation.'  —  And  all  this  is  to  be  believed,  on  the  alone  ground 
that  these  churches  make  the  most  worthless  pretensions,  to  the 
most  absurd  claim  of  an  apostolical  descent,  in  a  valid  prelalical 
succession,  for  which  they  can  give  no  reasonable  proof.  But 
when  charity,  and  candor,  and  christian  principles,  and  reason, 
demand  a  judgment  in  favor  of  the  Christianity  of  the  protestant 
churches,  even  of  such  as  are  acknowledged  to  be  pure  in  doc- 
trine, and  exemplary  in  practice,  and  which  give  abundant  proof 
of  the  indwelling  of  the  Holy  Ghost ;  they  are  all,  forsooth,  to  be 
excommunicated,  because  they  will  not  unite  in  consolidating  a 
spiritual  despotism,  and  usurpation  ;  which  is  founded  upon  the 
enslavement  of  the  laity,  the  unrighteous  subjugation  of  the  cler- 
gy ;  —  and  the  daring  elevation  to  more  than  imperial  power  of  a 
lordly  prelacy.-  This  judgment,  to  use  the  words  of  Bishop  Hall, 
is  demonstrative  of  "  injurious  uncharitableness,  and  presump- 
tion," "  in  shutting  out  those  from  the  church  of  Christ,  who  can 
truly  plead  all  these  just  claims  for  their  undoubted  interest  in 
that  holy  society."  "  What  a  presumptuous  violence  is  this  ! 
What  a  proud  uncharitableness  !  "  So  speaks  the  sainted  Bishop 
Hall,  when  allowed  to  utter  his  free  thoughts.  We  stand  with 
him  on  the  same  basis,  whereby  he  justified  the  English  church 
in  her  separation  from  the  Romish,  "  her  tyranny,  under  which 
were  comprised  her  challenged  ^n'mac//,  (in  her  apostolical  suc- 
cession ;)  her  impeccability  ;  her  idolatry  ;  her  heretical  opinions, 
her  flagitious  practices  and  doctrines  ;  "  —  and  spurning  from  us 
the  re-affirmation,  by  the  prelacy,  of  that  doctrine  of  primacy, 
which  is  the  source  of  all  the  rest — as  equally  contrary  to  the 
word  of  God  now,  as  it  was  then  ;  —  we  say  with  this  vene- 
rated writer,  "  wo  be  to  them,  by  whom  the  offence  of  our  divis- 
ion Cometh.  We  call  heaven  and  earth  to  the  witness  of  our  in- 
nocence, and  their  injustice."^ 

Let  it  also  be  borne  in  mind,  that  there  are  in  the 
English  and  American  episcopal  communions,  parties  who 
confessedly  differ  from  each  other  in  doctrinal  views,  and 
on  points  touching  the  very  essence  and  fundamentals  of 
the  gospel.*     Both   parties  agree   in  regarding  the  matters  in 

1)  Palmer  on  Ch.  vol.  i.  p.  459,  tatio  ad  Frat.  Commun.  inter  Eccl. 
and  Anct.  Christ,  vol.  i.  pp.  391,  392,      Evang.  Canib.  1640. 

349,  et  passim.  3)  Wks.  vol.  viii.  p.  52. 

2)  See  this  view  urged  by  Bishop  4)  Thus  Mr.  Colton,  in  his  Rea- 
Hall,  in  his  Peacemaker,  Wks.  vol.  sons  for  preferin^  Episcopacy,  p.  45, 
viii.  p.  51,  and  Baxter's  Treatise  on  &c.  remarks,  "  liow  different  tliis 
Episcopacy,  Lond.  1681,  pt.  ii.  ch.  xi.  from  the  practice  of  a  churcli  which 
and  Bishop  Davenant,  in  his  Adhor-  has     the     same     creed     throughout 


35S  THEIR   SELF-CONDEMNATION.  [lECT.  XIV. 

dispute,  as  doctrinal  —  and  as  fundamental  —  and  each  other, 
therefore,  as  fundamentally  wrong.  And  yet  neither  party 
unchurch  the  other,  or  proceed  to  an  actual  separation. 
What  palpable  bigotry  is  it  then,  to  unchurch  others,  for  differ- 
ing from  them  on  a  point  which  one  party  of  themselves,  will 
allow  not  to  be  essential ;  and  which  the  other  party  cannot,  with 
any  reason,  regard  as  of  the  same  importance  with  those  very 
points  on  which  they  internally  differ  from  their  own  brethren. 

"  Doth  not  the  world  know,"  says  the  venerated  Howe,  "  that 
wherein  we  differ  from  them,  we  differ  from  the  papists  too  ? 
And  that,  for  the  most  part,  wherein  they  differ  from  us,  they 
seem  to  agree  with  them  ?  We  acknowledge  their  strong,  brave 
and  prosperous  opposition  to  popery ;  but  they  have  opposed  it 
by  the  things  wherein  they  agree  with  us.  Their  differences 
from  us,  are  no  more  a  fence  against  popery,  than  an  enclosure 
of  straws  is  against  a  flame  of  fire."^ 

As  the  unreasonableness  of  this  Rabbinical  doctrine  ^  has  been 
very  fully  and  boldly  exposed,  by  an  eminent  episcopal  writer, 
we  would  beg  leave  to  close  what  we  deem  it  necessary  to  say 
on  this  point,  by  quoting  from  his  work. 

"  Let  those  who  entertain  this  high-church  intolerance,  con- 
sider that  in  the  actual  application  which  they  must  make  of  it, 
the  most  serious  danger  imaginable  is  incurred,  and  the  greatest 
possible  violence  is  done  to  the  dictates  of  good  sense,  and  to 
the  genuine  impulses  of  christian  love.  It  is  no  trivial  offence, 
we  may  be  sure,  and  no  slight  peril,  to  miscall  God's  work,  and 
Satan's.  This  was,  in  substance,  the  very  sin  of  the  Pharisees, 
which  our  Lord  branded  with  the  mark  of  unpardonable  blas- 
phemy. The  bold  bigotry  that  does  not  hesitate  to  assign  mil- 
lions of  Christ's  humble  disciples  to  perdition,  makes  the  pillars 
of  heaven  tremble.     Better  had  it  been  for  the  man  who  dares 

the    land,  in  every   man's,  in   every  1)  See  Rogers' Life  of  Howe,  p. 

woman's,  and  in  every  child's  hand."  367.     Also,  pp.  362,  358. 
And  yet  this  same  Mr.  Colton,  in  this  2)  See  Ihe  order  of  the  rabbini- 

eame  identical  work,  and  in  praise  cal  succession  given  in  the  Bib.  Re- 

of this  selfsame   protestant  episcopal  pos.  Oct.  1839,  pp.  3-6.     D'lsraeli, 

church  declares,  that  even  its  prelates  in  his  Genius  of  Judaism,  (p.  79,  2nd 

knowino-ly    allow    diversities  of  doc-  edit.)  speaking  of  the   uninterrupted 

trinal  views  in  the  clergy,  even  to  the  succession  of  the  rabbins  calls  it,  "  an 

rejection    of    doctrines    fundamental.  artifice,  or  rather  the   marvellous  im- 

"  Is  it  not  a  lesson,"  he  exclaims,  in  posture  of  a  bold  and  obscure  fiction, 

his  self-constituted  office  of  preceptor,  one  which  admitted   of  no  evidence, 

"Is  it  not  instructive.''     Does  it  not  and  which  allowed  of  no  denial,  whose 

prove  that  an   exact  agreement  even  airy  nature  eluded  the  grasp  while  it 

in  the  minor  poiw<.s  of  a  common  creed,  chained    the   eye,  the   legend  of  the 

and  I  may  add  in  some  of  the  car<iz7iai  rabbins."      (On  their    catalogues    of 

doctrines  of  Christianity,  is  not  essential  names,  see  ibid,  page  83,  &c.  and  page 

to    harmony   of  feeling,  to  christian  264.) 
fellowahip,  and  general  union,"  «fcc. 


LECT.  XIV.]         THIS  ABSURDITY  EPISCOPALLY  DESCRIBED.  359 

to  do  SO,  that  a  millstone  should  have  been  hung  around  his 
neck,  and  he  cast  into  the  sea. 

"  We  say,  let  such  arrogant  churchmen  consider  the  violence 
they  do  to  common  sense,  as  well  as  to  every  genuine  senti- 
ment. There  are  certain  affirmations  which,  though  wholly 
destitute  of  evidence,  may  yet  be  accepted  as  true,  without  sur- 
rendering reason  ;  but  there  are  others  that  are  to  be  entertained 
only  so  long  as  we  can  force  upon  ourselves  a  sort  of  temporary 
insanity.  For  illustration,  let  us  suppose  ourselves  standing 
in  front  of  a  temple  or  palace  ;  and  that  we  are  assured  by  one 
who  professes  a  more  than  human  knowledge  of  the  invisible 
constitution  of  things,  that  each  of  the  columns  of  the  portico, 
though  apparently  nothing  more  than  marble,  and  though  cold 
and  hard  to  the  touch,  is  actually  informed  with  animal  and  ra- 
tional life  ;  that  it  sees,  hears,  feels,  and  thinks  like  ourselves ; 
and,  in  a  word,  is  very  man,  while  to  the  eye,  a  pillar,  and  to 
the  touch  a  stone.  This  we  say,  marvellous  as  it  is,  may  be  be- 
lieved ;  all  we  want,  is  a  reason  for  giving  so  much  credit  to  our 
informant.  But  now,  let  this  same  person,  emboldened  by  our 
simplicity,  in  the  first  instance,  go  on  still  further  to  try  our 
powers  of  faith,  and  to  affirm  that  those  whom  we  take  to  be  men 
and  women,  ascending  the  steps,  and  entering  the  building,  and 
whom  we  fancy  to  hear  conversing  one  with  another,  and  with 
whom  we  ourselves,  have  just  before  conversed,  are  not,  as  they 
seem,  human  beings,  are  not  living,  are  not  rational  ;  but  are 
mere  stones  or  statues,  and  might,  without  consciousness  of  pain, 
or  effusion  of  blood,  be  shivered  by  the  chisel  and  mallet. 

"  At  this  point,  surely,  the  most  credulous  must  stop,  leaving 
the  mad  only  to  believe.  But  now  this  example  has  a  real 
analogy  with  the  insensate  intolerance  of  those,  who  after  con- 
versing with  christian  men,  and  beholding  their  good  works  and 
consistency,  and  after  being  compelled  to  admit  that  they  bear 
all  the  semblances  of  piety,  will  yet  call  them  children  of  the 
devil,  and  heirs  of  perdition,  because,  forsooth,  they  are  out  of 
the  pale  of  episcopacy  1  Transubstantiation  is  a  credible  dog- 
ma ;  but  this  enormity  insults  reason,  quite  as  much  as  it  does 
despite  to  pious  benevolence,  and  actually  breaks  down  the 
mind  that  submits  to  it.  What  can  a  man  be  worth,  either  in 
reason,  or  in  feeling,  after  he  has  thus  been  trodden  in  the  dust, 
and  made  sport  of  by  bigotry  so  preposterous  ?  It  might  in- 
deed seem  altogether  frivolous,  to  advert  seriously  to  extrava- 
gances of  this  sort,  if  it  were  not  very  true  that  they  pervade 
the  church,  and  under  different  forms  and  pretexts,  infect  the 
clerical  order  to  a  degree  that  involves  the  establishment  in  an 
extreme  degree.     Church  reform  may  help  us,  but  the  church 


360  THIS   ABSURDITY  EPISCOPALLY    DESCRIBED.       [LECT.  XIV. 

must  look  well  to  herself,  and  purge  out  thoroughly  the  old 
leaven  of  popish  intolerance,  or  no  reform  will  save  her.  Let 
the  common  people  throughout  the  country,  hear  methodists 
and  dissenters  spoken  of  from  the  pulpit,  frequently  and  freely 
as  christian  brethren,  not  a  hat  the  less  would  be  doffed  in  the 
porch  on  a  Sunday  :  on  the  contrary,  so  much  frank  truth  and 
charity,  uttered  by  the  clergy,  would  immensely  benefit  the 
church  at  the  present  crisis.  Whatever  may  be  the  faults  or 
errors  of  the  separatists,  they  themselves,  very  many  of  them, 
are  christians,  and  as  good  christians  as  churchmen  ;  and  to  deny 
this,  or  to  be  reluctant  to  confess  it,  is  not  to  injure  them,  but 
ourselves  :  nay  it  is  an  impudent  impiety,  such  as  a  wise  and 
good  man  must  shudder  to  think  of,  and  will  never  patiently 
bear. ''I 

We  have  thus  shown  the  unreasonableness  of  this  figment 
of  a  line  of  hereditary  successors  of  apostolic  grace  and  power, 
conveying  it  to  their  less  favored  brethren,  in  an  unbroken 
series.  There  is  not  the  shadow  of  proof  for  such  a  succession. 
These  ambassadors,  who  pretend  to  a  special  embassage  from 
God  to  man,  not  as  ministers  merely,  but  as  rulers  of  minis- 
ters, can  produce  no  commission.  They  bring  with  them  no 
special  instructions.  They  are  confessedly  incapacitated  for 
discharging  the  functions  of  that  office,  of  which  they  yet  de- 
clare that  they  are  the  sole  plenipotentiaries.  In  the  absence 
of  all  such  ability,  they  are  also  devoid  of  any  supernatural  cre- 
dentials of  such  supreme  jurisdiction  in  the  church  of  God.^ 

Neither  are  they,  in  fact,  the  sole  and  exclusive  sources  of 
divine  mercy  and  saving  grace  ;  while  they,  themselves,  and 
their  ministrations  also,  are  frequently  destitute  of  any  sem- 
blance of  a  divine  unction.  The  whole  scheme  is  preposterous, 
contrary  to  reason,  and  contradicted  by  the  plainest  testimony. 

1)  Spirit.  Dnsp.  pp.  404-407.  uninterrupfed  succession  of  popes  and 

2)  Dr.  Adam  Clarke  tlms  speaks  their  bisiiops  in  the  church,  who  alone 
on  this  subject,  (quoted  in  Dr.  Miller  have  the  authority  to  ordain  for  the 
on  the  Min.  p.  3G0,)  "  By  the  kind  sacerdotal  office  ;  and  whosoever  is 
providence  of  God,  it  appears  that  he  not  thus  appointed,  is,  with  them, 
has  not  permitted  any  apostolical  sue-  illegitimate.  It  is  idle  to  employ  time 
cession  to  l)e  preserved  ;  lest  the  in  proving  that  there  is  no  such  thing 
members  of  his  church  should  seek  as  an  uninterrupted  succession  of  this 
that  in  an  uninterrupted  succession  kind.  It  does  not  exist;  it  never  did 
which  must  be  found  in  the  head  exist.  It  is  a  silly  fable,  invented  by 
alone.  The  papists  or  Roman  catho-  ecclesiastical  tyrants,  and  supported 
lies,  who  '  boast  of  an  uninterrupted  by  clerical  cox.iombs.  But  were  it 
succession,  which  is  a  mere  fable,  that  even  true,  it  has  nothmg  to  do  with  the 
never  was,  and  never  can  be  proved,  text,  it  speaks  merely  of  the  appoint- 
have  raised  up  another  head,  —  the  mentofahigh  priest,  the  succession 
pope.'  "  Comment  on  Ezek.  xxxiv.  to  be  preserved  in  the  tribe  of  Levi, 
23.  Again,  he  says,  "Some  make  and  in  the  family  of  Aaron.  But  even 
Hebrews  (v.  4)  an  argument  for  the  this  succession  was  interrupted  and 


LECT.  XIV.]  NO   PRELACY    IN    HEAVEN.  361 

"These  wncovenanting  doctors,"  says  Mr.  Bristed,  in  his 
Thoughts  on  the  American-Anglo  Churches,'  "  do  actually  make 
belief  in  a  bishop  more  essential  to  salvation  than  faith  in  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ.  In  what  part  of  the  scriptures  do  these 
gentlemen  find,  that  eternal  life  is  made  to  hinge  upon  connex- 
ion with  any  particular  external  church  order  and  government  ? 
The  transit  of  an  immortal  soul  from  earth  to  heaven,  or  to 
hell,  depends  upon  far  other  grounds,  than  whether  he  was  an 
episcopalian,  or  presbyterian,  or  congregationalist.  The  word 
of  God  says:  '  He  that  believeth,  (in  Christ,  not  in  the  bishop,) 
and  is  baptized,  shall  be  saved  ;  and  he  that  believeth  not,  shall 
be  damned.'  Hence,  faith  in  the  redeeming  God,  is  the  indis- 
pensable condition  of  salvation  ;  notwithstanding  our  divines 
place  this  condition  upon  the  participation  of  christian  ordinan- 
ces at  the  hands  of  themselves  and  their  authorized  brethren." 

"  What !  ho  !  father  Abraham  !  "  said  Mr.  Whitfield,  when 
preaching  at  Philadelphia  —  "  whom  have  you  in  heaven  ?  any 
episcopalians  ?  No.  Any  presbyterians  ?  No.  Any  baptists  ? 
No.  Have  you  any  raethodists  there  ?  No.  Any  indepen- 
dents, or  covenanters,  or  burghers,  or  anti-burghers  ?  No.  Whom 
have  you,  then,  in  heaven  ?  "  cried  the  impassioned  preacher. 
'  We  know  not  any  of  those  names  here  ;  all  who  are  here 
are  christians  —  believers  in  Christ ;  men  who  have  overcome 
by  the  blood  of  the  Lamb,  and  the  word  of  his  testimony.'  Is 
this  the  case  ?  "  continued  the  venerable  speaker;  "  then,  God 
help  me  !  God  bless  us  all  to  forget  party  names,  and  sectarian 
distinctions,  and  bigoted  differences,  and  to  become  christians, 
indeed,  and  in  truth.  Amen  !  So  may  it  be,  amen  !  "  "This 
father  of  the  calvinislic  methodists  might  have  added  an  apos- 
trophe to  another  distinguished  personage,  and  said:  "Ho! 
Beelzebub  !  ho,  Satan  !  thou  prince  of  darkness,  thou  destroyer 
of  the  souls  of  men  !  are  there  any  papists  in  hell !  Yes.  Any 
proteslant  episcopalians  ?  Yes.  Any  independents,  or  congre- 
gationalists  ?  Yes.  Any  presbyterians  ?  Yes.  Any  methodists? 
Yes.  Any  baptists  ?  Yes.  Any  lay  churchmen,  teachers,  and 
preachers,  and  expounders  ?  Yes.  Have  you  any  christians  ? 
No.  We  have  an  innumerable  multitude  of  formalists,  and 
bigots,  and  sectarians,   and   persecutors  of  all   persuasions  and 

broken  ;  and  the  office  itself  was  to  See  the   absurdity   of  this   theory 

cease  on  tlie   coming  of  Christ,  after  fully  exposed     also    in     Dr.    Bangs' 

whom  there  could  be  no  high  priest;  Original  Church  of  Christ,  Numbers 

nor  can  Christ  have   any  successor,  15-19,  pp  97- 243,  and  in  the  Rights 

and,  therefore,  he  is  said  to  be  a  priest  of  Christ.  Ch.    pp.  313,  314,  317,  364, 

for  ever;  for  he  ever  liveth  the  inter-  365. 

cessor   and   sacrifice    for  mankind."  1)  Ibid,  p.  25G. 
Comment,  on  Heb.  v.  4. 

46 


362 


THE  DANGEROUS  RESULTS  OF  PRELACY.    [lECT.  XIV. 


denominations,  of  every  tongue,  and  name,  and  country,  in  that 
region,  soil,  and  clime,  where  their  worm  dieth  not,  and  where 
their  fire  is  never  quenched.  But  we  have  not  one  solitary 
christian,  of  any  age,  or  either  sex."' 

Who  can  tell  the  number  of  souls  who  have  been  lulled  into 
the  sleep  of  eternal  death,  by  those  teachers  who  place 
the  external  order  of  their  church,  upon  a  level  with  the 
merits  of  the  Redeemer,  to  procure  acceptance  before  God  ? 
Nay,  as  to  non-episcopalians,  episcopacy  is  the  first,  and 
faith  in  Christ  only  the  second  requisite  ;  for,  says  the  writer 


1)  The  argument  is Ihus  present- 
ed in  a  late  number  of  the  Eclectic 
Rev. :  "  We  will  suppose  again,  that 
the  catalogue  could  be  completed, 
what  would  it  avail  them  among  a 
christian  people,  when  it  would  ap- 
pear that  they  inherit  tii rough  such 
utter  reprobates,  infidels,  sinionisis, 
and  monsters,  as  all  history  shows 
have  occupied  the  bishops'  chairs, 
lirst  in  England,  and  next  at  the  head 
quarters  of  Rome?  John  XII.  was 
degraded  by  a  council,  that  charged 
him  with  every  abomination  that  ever 
disgraced  a  human  monster.  Leo,  a 
wretch  little  better,  was  set  up  in  his 
place.  Yet  Baronius  and  Binius  trace 
the  succession  through  John,  and  not 
through  Leo.  John  was  a  simonist, 
a  drunkard,  a  murderer,  an  adulterer, 
a  worshipper  of  idols,  and  of  the  devil. 
Yet  this  monster  was  the  channel 
through  which  our  successionists 
claim  to  have  received  the  Holy 
Ghost !  Then,  at  another  time,  there 
were  three  popes,  all  making  war 
upon  each  other,  and  fighting  with 
armies  to  make  their  way  to  the  a|)os- 
lolic  chair,  and  convey  the  Holy  Spir- 
it's influence  pure  from  the  Fountain- 
head  to  all  their  christian  successors. 
In  the  eleventh  century  simony  was 
universally  practised  in  Italy.  It  was 
for  a  long  time  much  the  same  in 
England,  and  Godwin  shows  at  what 
exorbitant  prices  many  of  the  Eng- 
lish bishops  procured  ordination  from 
the  pope.  '  Come  here,"  says  Stil- 
lingfleet, '  to  Rome,  and  here  the  suc- 
cession is  as  muddy  as  the  Tiber  it- 
self.' Iren.  p.  'H'i.  Much  good  may 
it  do  to  the  successionists  to  take  their 
fill  of  such  a  stream,  and  claim  their 
descent  though  such  chinnels.  Yet 
all  this  comes,  and  infinitely  more,  if 
we  had  but  room  to  state  it,  through 
their   arrogant,   thriftless,   and    con- 


temptible boasts  of  apostolical  succes- 
sion. It  deserves  to  be  held  up  to  the 
utter  scorn  and  ridicule  of  the  whole 
jjrotestant  world.  It  is  an  outrageous 
insult  to  common  sense.  If  the  men 
who  are  now  perpetrating  it  in  the 
face  of  England,  were  open  to  the  ar- 
gumentum  ad  modtsliam,  we  would 
just  remind  them,  that  the  Homily  for 
Whitsunday,  pt  2,  declares  that  '  the 
popes  and  prelates  of  Rome,  for  the 
most  part,  are  worthily  accounted 
among  the  number  of  false  prophets, 
and  false  Christs,  which  deceived  the 
world  a  long  while;'  and  then  it 
prays,  that  the  gospel  of  Christ  may 
be  received  in  all  parts  of  the  world, 
'  to  the  beating  down  of  sin,  death, 
the  pope,  the  devil,  and  all  the  king- 
doms of  antichrist.'  To  these  homi- 
lies, we  believe,  every  clergyman 
subscribes,  as  containing  'a  godly  and 
wholesome  doctrine,  fit  to  be  read  in 
churches  by  ministers.'  Yet  we  are 
now  informed  by  these  ministers  of 
Christ,  that  these  popes  and  prelates 
are  the  very  men  that  have  communi- 
cated to  them  exclusively  the  Holy 
Spirit  and  the  apostolic  doctrine. 
Gentlemen  and  christian  ministers, 
what  has  become  of  your  modesty 
and  consistency  .''  Can  ye  do  all  this 
in  the  face  of  God,  and  expect  us, 
or  this  protestant  nation,  to  believe 
and  respect  you  .'  Why  does  not  ev- 
ery honest  clergyman  disdainfully  re- 
ject this  wicked  boast .'' 

"  Since  tlie  Church  of  England  has, 
by  its  public  documents,  denounced 
the  church  of  Rome  as  a  heretical, 
foul,  filthy,  and  antichristian  church, 
we  should  be  glud  to  know  how  such 
a  church  could  communicate  the 
apostolicnl  virtue  .'  Indeed,  the  suc- 
cessionists shall  take  either  of  these 
alternatives,  and  must  take  one  of 
them.     Let  the  church  of  Rome  be  a 


LECT.  XIV. J    THE  DANGEROUS  RESULTS  OF  PRELACY. 


363 


above  cited,  "  whoever  is  in  communion  with  the  bishop,  the 
supreme  governor  ot  the  church  upon  earth,  is  in  communion 
with  Christ,  the  head  of  it ;  and  whoever  is  not  in  communion 
with  the  bishop,  is  thereby  cut  off  from  communion  with 
Christ." 


true  church,  or  let  it  be  a  false  one. 
We  care  not  which,  for  in  either  case 
the  Church  of  England  is  con- 
demned. If  it  was  a  true  church,  then 
the  Church  of  England  was  guilly  of 
schism  in  leaving  it,  and  is  itself  a 
false  church  ;  and  if  the  church  of 
Rome  was  a  false  church,  then  it  could 
not  be  a  pure  fountain  of  apostolical 
succession,  and  so  your  apostolicity 
is  tossed  from  the  one  horn  to  the 
other  of  this  dilemma.  The  doctrine 
of  lineal  descent  is  stultified  eiiually, 
whichever  proposition  is  assumed." 

Prelatists  are  very  fond  of  carica- 
turing, and  then  grossly  abusing,  the 
doctrine  of  predestination,  as  being  so 
merciless  and  exclusive.  "  Such  an 
objection  comes  surely  with  an  ill 
grace  from  those,  who  would  have  us 
believe  that  God  has  predestined  to 
an  exclusive  personal  election  to  all 
the  privileges  of  the  church  on  earth, 
and  to  the  only  covenanted  salvation, 
the  prelatical  successors  of  the  rev- 
erend line  of  popes,  and  those  who 


will  submit  to  their  spiritual  jurisdic- 
tion. 

"  Such  presumption  and  arro- 
gance," says  an  episcopalian  writer, 
(Bristed's  Thoughts  on  the  Am.  An- 
glo Ch.  p.  427,)  "  would  be  ridicu- 
lous, were  it  not  truly  lacryma- 
ble,  that  any  one  single,  individual 
protestant  can  be  found  in  the  nine- 
teenth century,  so  foolishly  fanatic, 
so  basely  bigoted,  so  unchristian,  so 
antichristian,  as  to  advance  this  rank- 
est of  all  the  dogmas  of  popery.  And 
these  men,  who  thus  liberally  uncov- 
enant,  unchurch,  unchristianize,  all 
other  denominations,  call  themselves 
Arminians ;  and  profess  to  believe, 
that  the  Saviour  died  for  all  mankind, 
including  heathens  and  Mahometans, 
as  well  as  christians ;  and  certainly, 
the  warriors  of  the  crescent,  and  the 
worshippers  of  the  innumerable  pa- 
gan deities,  are  quite  as  sturdy  non- 
episcopalians,  as  the  presbyterians,  or 
congregationalists,  or  baptists,  can 
possibly  be." 


LECTURE   XV. 


THE     PRELATICAL     DOCTRINE    OF    APOSTOLICAL    SUCCESSION     SUICIDAL. 

We  now  advance  to  another  position,  by  which  we  would 
expose  the  unsoundness  of  this  doctrine,  and  that  is,  that  it  is 
suicidal ;  and  destructive  in  its  application,  to  those  who  would 
audaciously  stake  on  this  filmy  and  unsubstantial  vision,  the 
whole  destinies  of  the  human  family. 

This  doctrine  —  that  apostolical  succession,  that  is,  its  bold 
assumption,  gives  right  to  apostolic  power,  and  secures  to  the 
church  possessing  it  apostolic  doctrine  —  is  as  destructive  to  its 
avowers,  as  it  is  intolerant  to  its  rejectors.  It  is  apostatical  and 
not  apostoHcal.  —  It  overthrows  the  discipline  of  Christ ;  while 
it  destroys  the  hopes  of  those  who  are  true  disciples  of  Christ. 
And  while  contending  for  Christ's  seamless  coat,  crucifies  him 
afresh  in  his  living  members. 

Archbishop  Laud,  the  canonized  saint  and  martyr  of  prelatists,' 
confesses  that  this  succession  stands  or  falls  with  the  opinion  that 
the  church  of  Rome  "never  erred"  in  fundamentals;^  and  that 
on  the  ascertained  genuineness  and  validity  of  her  claims  to  the 
succession,  depend  the  hopes  of  the  English  prelacy.^  Now,  as 
the  stream  can  rise  no  higher  than  its  source,  it  follows  that  what- 
ever virtue,  power,  authority,  or  truth,  this  succession  is  supposed 
to  confer  upon  the  hierarchy  in  England,  it  must  confer,  a  for- 
tiori, on  the  hierarchy  of  Rome.  For  if  this  succession  is  in- 
sufficient to  authenticate  the  claims  of  the  church  of  Rome,  and 
to  perpetuate  in  her,  truth  of  doctrine  and  propriety  of  order; 
then  neither  can  it  enstamp  with  apostolic  character,  the  doc- 
trines and  order  of  the  Anglican  prelacy.  If  after  all,  this  boasted 
succession  does  not  in  fact  preserve,  or  prove,  truth  ;  and  does 

J)  See  The  Cathedral.  3)  Oxford  Tracts,  vol.  i.  p.  88. 

2)  See  Neal's  Puritans,  vol.  iii. 
pp.  189, 193. 


366 


THE    POWER    THAT   GIVES   CAN    TAKE   AWAY.       [lECT.  XV. 


not,  therefore,  transmit  necessarily  authority  and  power;  then  it 
is  not  the  fountain  of  divine  grace  ;  it  is  not  the  source  of  the 
plenitude  of  power  ;  it  is  not  the  necessary  channel  of  divine 
mercy  and  fulfilled  promises,  —  and  we  are  left  to  seek  the  true 
church  by  other,  and  more  certain,  marks  and  qualities. > 

If  the  plenary  authority  to  grant  this  grace  and  power  by 
prelatical  ordination  is  intrusted  to  the  proper  officers  of  the 
church,  to  be  exercised  for  its  benefit  and  at  their  discretion  ; 
then  it  follows  of  course,  that  there  is  given  to  these  officers, 
when  deemed  necessary  for  securing  this  object,  the  power  of 
revoking  and  annulling  the  ordinations  already  infelicitously 
conferred.  Being  the  source  of  all  the  authority  thereby  vested, 
they  are  of  course  competent  to  recall  it,  when  in  their  judg- 
ment unworthily  received.  But  if  this  is  so  —  and  on  the  prin- 
ciples of  this  doctrine  of  the  apostolical  succession,  how  can  it 
be  denied  ?  then  truly  is  the  boasted  succession  of  the  Anglican, 
yea,  and  of  the  Romish  church,  for  ever  blighted.*  Let  one  or 
two  illustrations  suffice  ;  and  first  let  us  instance,  in  the  memo- 
rable case  of  the  Roman  catholic  see  of  Utrecht :  —  "  All  the 


1)  "  In  any  other  body  politic,  a 
man,  by  leaving  it,  loses  all  the  powers 
he  had  by  being  of  it ;  and  there's  no 
reason  why  't  is  not  the  same  in  an 
ecclesiastical  society ;  and  consequent- 
ly all  the  church  powers  the  protestant 
bishops  could  have,  must  be  derived 
from  the  members  of  the  new  church 
they  then  joined  themselves  with." 
(Rights  of  the  Christian  Church,  by 
an  Episcopalian.     Lon.  1707,  p.  323.) 

2)  Again, (pp.324,352,)  "If  a  bish- 
op, by  leaving  the  Church  of  Rome, 
did  not,  by  that  act,  lose  all  the  episco- 
pal power  he  had  when  he  was  one  of 
the  governors  of  that  church,  especial- 
ly considering  no  commission  can  well 
be  extended  to  authorize  the  opposing 
him  who  bestowed  it,  yet  the  popish 
bishops  had  as  much  power  to  deprive 
or  degrade  him  as  to  ordain  him  ;  since 
a  sentence  is  valid,  though  not  right, 
when  done  by  competent  authority ; 
and  consequently  the  popish  bishops, 
in  the  time  of  Queen  Mary,  or  Queen 
Elizabeth,  had  as  much  right  to  un- 
make as  they  had  to  make  a  bishop  in 
their  father's  or  grandfather's  time." 

"  This,  though  no  more  were  said, 
plainly  shows  that  the  hypothesis  of 
ecclesiastical  government  belonging 
to  such  bishops  only  as  derive  their 
power  by  way  of  succession  from 
catholic  or  apostolic  predecessors,  un- 
churches not  only  all   the   reformed 


who  are  without  bishops,  but  all  the 
episcopalians  likewise." 

"In  a  word,  nothing  can  be  more 
senseless  than  this  notion  of  an  in- 
delible character,  because  all  power, 
of  what  nature  soever,  conveyed  by 
men,  is  a  trust,  and  as  such  may  be 
taken  away,  when  the  persons  intrust- 
ed with  it  act  contrary  to  the  ends  for 
which  they  were  intrusted  ;  of  which 
those  who  intrusted  them  must  needs 
retain  a  right  to  judge  ;  and  conse- 
quently priests  and  bishops  may  be 
reduced  to  the  lay-state  they  were  at 
first  in." 

Mr.  Dodwell  argues,  (see  Rights 
of  the  Christian  Church,  p.  325,) 
"  that  the  deprivation  of  the  popish 
bishops  was  only  of  their  temporalities; 
their  sees,  as  to  their  spiritualities,  be- 
ing before  vacant  ;  the  protestants 
owing  them  no  duty,  even  in  con- 
science, before  deprivation." 

Now,  "  If  those  bishops  were  not 
bishops  of  the  protestants  before  their 
deprivation,  then  they  had  no  bishops, 
and  consequently  by  his  own  princi- 
ples, no  priests,  no  sacraments,  no 
christian  church  ;  and  if  they  were 
not  obliging  in  conscience  before  de- 
privation, it  was  because  the  people, 
judging  them  guilty  of  gross  errors, 
had,  by  renouncing  all  communion 
with  them,  withdrawn  their  obedience 
from  them,  and  deprived  them  of  all 


LECT.  XV.]  PRELATISTS    DEVOUR    ONE    ANOTHER.  367 

bishops  of  this  see/  have  been  regularly  consecrated ;  but 
because  Dominic  Varlet,  who  a  hundred  years  ago  consecrated 
the  first  bishop,  was  at  that  time  under  the  censure  of  the  pope, 
the  whole  see  has  ever  since  been  declared  schismatical,  and 
each  successive  prelate  has  regularly  received  a  renewed  con- 
demnation from  the  sovereign  pontiff.''  A  similar  example  is 
recorded  by  Calvin,  in  the  case  of  Eugenius  and  Amadeus. 
When  by  the  decree  of  the  council  of  Basil,  Eugenius  was  de- 
posed, degraded,  and  pronounced  guilty  of  schism,  together 
with  all  the  bishops  and  cardinals,  who  had  united  with  him  in 
opposing  the  council,  Calvin  says,  the  succession  of  the  minis- 
try was  at  this  time  virtually  broken,  for,  '  from  the  bosom  of 
these  heretics  and  rebels,  have  proceeded  all  the  popes,  cardi- 
nals, bishops,  abbots,  and  priests,  ever  since.' "' 

As  to  the  Anglican  succession,  the  case  is  equally  plain. 
Being,  according  to  this  doctrine,  derived  from  the  Romish 
church,  and  being  on  the  principles  of  this  doctrine  absolutely 
withdrawn  by  that  church,  no  such  valid  succession  can  exist, 
and  the  Anglican  church  is  plainly  upstart  and  schismatical. 
Dr.  Milner,  as  we  have  seen,*  urges  that  the  Anglican  bishops, 
by  taking  their  commission  from  the  king,  renounced  all  title  from 
Christ  or  his  apostles.  Dodwell  applies  the  same  argument  to 
the  Romish  bishops  who  took  out  commissions  from  Henry 
VIII.,  and  who,  since  there  cannot  be  two  originals  of  the 
same  power,  renounced  all  other  and  better  title  to  their  office/ 
And  thus  do  prelatists,  like  the  fabled  serpent,  devour  one  an- 
other. 

Further,  as  prelatical  writers  tell  us  that  we  cannot  preach, 
unless  authorized  by  prelates ;  so  do  the  Romanists  teach  that 
these  prelates  themselves  cannot  officiate,  unless  empowered  to 
do  so  by  the  pope.  "  Particular  bishops,""  say  they,  "  who 
have  only  the  care  of  their  flocks  committed  to  them,  cannot 
send  into  the  provinces  of  others  ;    therefore  this  ought  to  be 

the  spiritual  jurisdiction  they  had  over  1)  Letters  on  the  Min.  Rit.  and 

thern  ;  which,  contrary  to  the  whole  Lit.  of  Prot.  Ep.  Ch.  by  Mr.   Jared 

drift  and  design  of  his  book,  proves  Sparks,  Bait.  1820,  pp.  44,  45. 
that   the    bishop's   power   is   derived  2)    See   the   Pastoral   Letter    of 

from  and  dependent  on    the   people  ;  Archbishop  Marechal  to  the  congrega- 

and  what  they  could   do  thus  them-  tion  of  Norfolk,  Virginia,  1819,  2d  ed. 

selves    by   a    tacit    agreement,    they  appendix,  p.  84. 

might  authorize  the  Queen  to  do  sol-  3)  Institutes;  Dedication  to  the 

emnly  and    formally  ;    or   rather    the  King,  p.  25. 

people    having,  by   renouncing   their  4)  Doctr.  of  Ch.  of  Eng.  concern- 
communion,  deprived  them  of  all  the  ing  Independ.  of  Clergy,  &c.  p.  28. 
spiritual    power   and   authority   tliey  5)  Limborch  Body  of  Div.  b.  ?ii. 
could  pretend  to  over  them,  the  Queen  chap.  iii.  p.  911. 
took  from  them  all  those  legal  rights 
and  privileges  the  law  had  invested 
them  with." 


368  ALL   PRETENCE    TO    THE    SUCCESSION   DESTROYED.      [lECT.  XV. 

done  by  an  universal  bishop,  who  has  the  charge  of  the  whole 
church  committed  to  him."  Now  this  right  the  Romanists 
found  both  upon  scripture  and  antiquity,  and  therefore,  as  An- 
glican prelates  must  allow,  the  mere  plea  of  scripture  and  anti- 
quity, without  solid  proof,  will  not  suffice  for  the  establishment 
of  these  prelatical  dogmas ;  while  the  assumption  of  authority 
and  power  to  give  or  withhold  the  ministerial  commission,  is 
fatal  to  both  the  Roman  and  the  Anglican  hierarchy,  and  may 
be  as  justifiably  advanced  by  all  other  denominations  as  by 
either  of  these. ^ 

And  thus  does  it  appear  that  there  is,  on  this  basis,  and  when 
tested  by  these  principles,  no  certain  or  valid  succession  in  any 
extant  church. 

Once  more.  If  the  English  hierarchy  possesses  whatever  divine 


1)  The  following  confessions 
taken  from  Mr.  Dodwell,  and  the 
author  of  "  The  case  of  the  Regale," 
will  be  considered  as  decisive  : 

Mr.   Dodwell   says,  (Doct.  of  the 
Ch.  of  Eng.  Concern.  Indep.   of  the 
Clergy,  §  33,)  "  that  in  a  revolution 
of  ages,  there   is  no  succession  in  the 
world,  but  has  some  unjustifiable  turn. 
Nor  is  there,"  says  he,  "  any  thing  in 
the   nature   of  ecclesiastical   govern- 
ment, as  it  is  a  government  of  external 
bodies,  managed  by  men  of  like  in- 
firmities with  those  who  are  engaged 
with  civil  government,  that  can  secure 
it  against  the  like  violences  of  am- 
bitious and    unreasonable   men,   who 
would    judge   too   partially   in    their 
own    case.      Such    violences    on  the 
government  may  sometimes  make  a 
breach  in  the  due  succession,  and  af- 
fect the   direct  conveyances  of   that 
authority  from  God  which  is  requisite 
to  the  giving  a  title  to  those  spiritual 
benefits  to  souls,  which  are  the  great 
design  of  ecclesiastical  communion." 
The   author   of  "  The  case  of  the 
Regale,"  (p.  77,  ed.  1st,)  also  allows 
"  that  it  would  be  hard  to  find  a  bishop 
against  whom  some  of  these  objections 
(relating  to  succession)  do  not  lie  ;  for 
example,  all  the  bishops  of  the  refor- 
mation, as  well   in   England  as  else- 
where, are  struck  off  at  one  blow  ;  for 
they  all  derived  from  those  who  now 
account  to  be.  and  then  to  have  been 
heretics.     And  the  ordinations  of  the 
church    of   Rovie    must    go    off    too, 
especially  since  the  council  of  Con- 
stimcr,  that  turned  out  all   the   popes 
that  were  then  in   tlie  world,  which 
were  three  anti-popes  contending  one 


with  another.  And  they  cannot  say 
of  any  of  their  ordinations  at  this  day, 
that  they  are  not  derived  from  some 
or  other  who  were  '  avians,  semi- 
urians,'  "  &c. 

"  Should  we,"  says  the  author  of 
"The  Rights  of  the  Christian  Cnurch," 
(Lond.  1707,  p.  350,)  "allow  an  in- 
delible character,  yet  the  papists  make 
so  many  things  necessary  to  the  ob- 
taining of  it,  that  'tis  next  to  impossi- 
ble they  should  have  been  always 
regularly  performed  amongst  them. 
But  not  to  insist  on  these  things, 
which  they  more  than  others  suppose 
necessary  to  the  obtaining  of  an  in- 
delible character,  I  say  that  in  case  of 
schism,  where  two  pretend  to  the 
same  see,  the  schismatic  cannot  be 
bishop  of  a  see  which  was  before  filled 
witli  another  ;  and  if  not  of  that  he 
pretends  to,  much  less  of  any  other  ; 
and  if  he  were  not  a  bisliop  before, 
(the  translation  of  bishops  being  a 
modern  practice,  and  contrary  to  the 
ancient  canons  of  the  church,)  he 
was  never  in  possession  of  the  indeli- 
ble character,  and  consequently  was 
not  capable  of  conveying  it  to  another  ; 
which,  in  the  church  of  Rome,  must 
be  a  bar  to  the  apostolical  succession, 
since  there  have  been,  as  their  own 
historian,  Onuphius,  proves,  at  least 
thirty  schisms  occasioned  by  several, 
no  less,  sometimes,  than  five  or  si.x, 
pretending  to  the  popedom  at  once  : 
and  one  of  their  schisms  lasted  more 
than  fifty  years,  when  one  pope  sat  at 
Rome  and  the  other  at  Avignon,  thun- 
dering out  all  sorts  of  curses  and  cen- 
sure against  each  other." 


LECT.  XV.]  THE   ANGLICAN  SUCCESSION  —  A  SECESSION.  369 

authority  and  power  she  claims,  by  virtue  of  this  succession  of 
prelates,  to  whom  God  infallibly  secured  the  fulfilment  of  his 
promises  and  the  perpetual  enjoyment  of  his  presence  ;  —  then 
must  these  same  prerogatives  as  surely  attach  to  every  other  body 
of  men,  who  have  the  same  assurance  in  boasting  of  this  inherited 
apostolate ;  and  on  this  ground  may  this  doctrine  be  made  to  en- 
stamp  the  impress  of  heaven  upon  dogmas  the  most  contradictory 
and  false,  and  upon  practices  the  most  puerile  and  superstitious. 
These  prerogatives  must,  on  this  theory  of  right,  belong  and 
now  reside  in  the  churches  of  France,  of  Spain,  and  of  Rome. 
Nay,  throughout  the  world,  there  is  scarcely,  —  not  to  say  a  nation, 
or  people, — not  even  a  city  of  any  magnitude  or  consequence, 
in  which  the  religion  of  Christ  may  be  said  to  exist,  that  does 
not  ascribe  the  first  planting  of  its  church,  to  one  or  other  of  the 
apostles,  or  to  some  of  their  immediate  and  intimate  disciples  ; 
so  that  the  Russians,  the  Poles,  the  Prussians,  the  Greeks,  the 
Abyssinians,  the  Orientals,  pronounce  themselves,  in  the  spirit 
of  all  ancient  nations,  to  be  the  descendants  of  the  gods,  and 
the  genuine  successors  to  apostolic  dignity  and  power. i 

Either  then,  the  English  church  holds  to  the  same  faith,  sub- 
stantially, which  is  held  by  the  Romish  and  all  these  other 
churches,  or  it  holds  to  a  faith  essentially  different  from  them. 
If  the  faith,  to  which  the  Anglican  succession  bears  testimony, 
is  different  from  that  held  by  these  churches,  then  must  its  suc- 
cession be  also  different.  It  is  a  new  succession,  for  it  testifies 
to  a  body  of  truth,  differing  from  that  to  which  the  same  suc- 
cession in  the  Romish  and  other  churches  previously  attested. 
It  is,  therefore,  a  broken  succession.  It  is  not  a  succession,  but 
a  secession  —  and  the  Church  of  England  is  not  a  colony,  but  a 
revolutionary  society.  But  if,  on  the  other  hand,  its  system  of 
doctrine  is  not  thus  different,  then  are  Anglican  prelatists  in  a 
state  of  declared  excommunication,^  and  bound  to  acknowledge 
themselves,  if  not  Romanists  in  fact  —  yet  papists  in  reality. 
The  mere  claim  of  apostolical  succession  —  apart  from  doc- 
trine—  if  pretensions  as  bold,  and  confident,  aye,  and  as  au- 
thenticated, as  those  of  the  English  and  Romish  churches,  are 
sufficient  —  will  stamp  the  seal  of  catholicity  on  churches  of 
every  name  and  character. 

"  The  Arian  churches  which  once  predominated  in  the  king- 
doms of  the  Ostrogoths,  the  Visigoths,  the  Burgundians,  the 
Vandals,  and  the  Lombards,  were  all  episcopal  churches,  and 

1)  See  Vidals  Mosheim's  Com-  2)  See  Bp.  Hall's  Wks.  vol.  viii. 

ment.  vol.  i.  pp.  145,  146.     See  the      p.  50,  &c. 
li.st  of  these  given  by  Fabricius,  in 
his  Lux.  Evang.  pp.  83,  93. 

47 


370  PRELATISTS    MUTUALLY   CONDEMN    EACH    OTHER.     [lECT.  XV. 

all  had  a  fairer  claim  than  that  of  England  to  the  apostolical  suc- 
cession, as  being  much  nearer  to  the  apostolical  times.  In  the 
East,  the  Greek  church,  which  is  at  variance  on  points  of  faith 
with  all  the  western  churches,  has  an  equal  claim  to  this  suc- 
cession. The  Nestorian,  the  Eutychian,  the  Jacobite  churches, 
all  heretical,  all  condemned  by  counsels,  of  which  even  protest- 
ant  divines  have  generally  spoken  with  respect,  had  an  equal 
claim  to  the  apostolical  succession.'" 

These  churches  are  all,  therefore,  equally  supreme  in  power ; 
authoritative  to  interpret  scripture ;  to  decree  rites,  ceremonies, 
and  forms  ;  to  hand  down  apostolical  traditaments  ;  and  to  de- 
cide when,  and  how  far,  to  exercise  these  vested  rights,  under 
the  guidance  of  promises  to  be  infallibly  fulfilled  ;  whether  it 
be  in  the  way  of  legislative,  judicial,  or  executive  functions.^ 
That  the  church  should  be  indefectible  in  England,  and  infalli- 
ble at  Rome  ;  the  eucharist  a  real  and  efficacious  sacrifice  in  the 
one  place,  and  a  real  presence  of  the  body  sacrificed  in  the 
other  ;  and  that  baptism  should  be  regeneration  in  both  ;  these 
are  accidental  variations,  or  agreements,  that  do  not  affect  the 
substance  of  the  doctrine  in  question. 

The  church  of  Rome,  and  all  other  corrupt  and  apostatical 
communions,  and  the  Church  of  England,  stand  or  fall  together. 
Touch  but  the  standing  of  one,  and  you  pierce  that  spinal  cord 
by  which  life  and  sensation  are  conveyed  to  every  limb  and 
member  of  the  entire  body.  That  these  claims,  then,  may  be 
verified,  the  character  of  the  purest  and  best  churches  under 
heaven  must  be  blasted  and  destroyed,  while  that  of  churches 
the  most  heretical  must  be  honorably  sustained.'' 

But  it  so  happens,  through  that  law  of  Providence,  by  which 
the  partners  in  evil  are  sure  to  conspire  against  each  other,  that 
these  several  churches  have  turned  king's  evidence  against  each 
other,  and  have  proclaimed  to  the  world  their  mutual  treachery 
and  deceit.  Forth  steps  the  Greek  church,  and  at  the  bar  of 
Heaven  impleads  her  Latin  co-rival  for  her  insolence  and  heresy, 
and  excommunicates  her  from  all  participation  in  this  succes- 
sion. Then  rises  the  Latin  church,  in  all  her  wrath,  and  hurls 
back  her  thunders,  at  the  false  foundations  of  this  unsubmissive 
hierarchy.^  And  when  the  churches  of  the  reformation  attempt- 
ed to  steal  fire  from  the  Romish  altar,  wherewith  to  erect  other 
and  separate  altars,  with  what  withering  anathemas  did  this  Ro- 

1)  Edinb.  Rev.  April,  1839,  p.  3)  On  the  absurdity  of  rejecting 
141.  On  the  heretical  character  of  the  presbyterian  ordination  and  admitting 
Greek  and  Oriental  churches,  see  the  the  validity  of  popish,  see  Towgood's 
Lond.  Chr.  Obs.  Feb.  1841,  pp.  66, 67.  Dissent  Justified,  pp.  82,  87, 179, 195. 

2)  See  Hanbury's  Hooker,  vol.  i.  4)  See  Bp.  Hall,  vol.  viii.  p.  50, 
p.  30.  and  his  references. 


LECT.  XV.]      THE    ANGLICAN    PRELACY    IN    GUEAT    STRAITS.  371 

mish  hierarchy  despoil  them,  and  the  English  among  the  rest, 
of  their  ill-gotten  booty.' 

Bossuet,  and  others,  convict  the  English  church  of  schism, 
heresy,  and  usurpation  f  of  being,  in  short,  in  the  self-same  pre- 
dicament of  that  unfortunate  presbyter,  Ischryas,  of  whom  it 
was  decreed,  in  a  council  of  prelates,  that  he  "  had  assumed  to 
himself  an  imaginary  episcopacy,"  and,  in  punishment  there- 
of, he  was  commanded,  on  the  peril  of  ghostly  censure,  "  to  re- 
turn to  that  order  of  presbyters  whereto  he  was  ordained,"  — 
and  from  which,  at  the  same  time,  they  had  just  declared  his 
departure  to  be  merely  "  imaginary  !  "^  Now  we  will  venture 
to  say,  that,  on  strict  succession  principles,  whatever  answer  is 
retorted  upon  these  Romish  judges,  will  retort  back  again  upon 
these  prelatists  themselves  ;  and  that  in  attempting  to  secure 
their  own  apostolic  superstructure,  they  will  be  found,  as  has 
been  said  of  these  Romish  architects,  "  building  one  assumption 
upon  another  assumption,  piling  one  ecclesiastical  Ossa  upon 
an  ecclesiastical  Pelion  ;  placing  (after  the  manner  of  the  Hin- 
doo legend)  their  spiritual  universe  upon  the  horns  of  the  bull, 
and  the  bull  upon  the  back  of  the  tortoise,  and  the  tortoise  it- 
self upon  vacuity."'' 

Certain  it  is,  that  that  great  divine, —  now  in  such  goodly  re- 
pute (is  it  not  by  some  great  mistake  ?)  at  Oxford*  —  the  Rev. 
Thomas  Jackson,  demonstrates  on  behalf  of  the  English  church, 
(as  one  of  "  us,  the  reformed  churches  "e)  that  the  Rom- 
ish church  is  "  the  synagogue  of  satan,"  "  antichrist,"  "  a 
usurper  in  the  chair  of  God's  saints"  —  "an  intruder  into  the 
church  which  had  been  holy  and  catholic  before  his  intrusion," 
and  guilty  of  "  idolatry  much  worse  than  that  of  the  heathen."'' 

Now  the  query  to  be  resolved  by  these  casuists  is  this:  If 
this  succession  consists  in  the  transmitted  gifts  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 

1)  Ibid,  p.  51.  Rome,  in  a  work  addressed,  too,  to  a 

2)  See  Faber's  Albigenses,  p.  14,  lady,  the  Countess  of  Newburgh  ? 
and  Palmer,  vol.  ii.  p.  450,  »&c.;  Neal's  How  does  he  speak  of  that  church  ? 
Purit.  vol.  iv.  p.  178.  "  It  is  to  be  observed,"  he  says,  "  by 

3)  See  Potter  on  Ch.  Govt.  pp.  every  one  now-a-days,  that  the  filth 
262,  263.  OF  ■OUR  church  doth  empty  itself 

4)  Faber's  Albigenses,  p.  17.  into  the  sink  of  rome."    See  p.  8. 

5)  So  thinks  Sishop  Mcllvaine  Again  he  says,  "  Leaving  the 
also.  wretches  to  the  righteous  judgment 

6)  See  Works,  vol.  iii.   pp.  888,  of  God."     Bull's  Vind.  p.  124 

b.  12,  ch.  xxi.  Again,   "But,  alas,    we    may  now 

7)  See  Wks.  vol.  iii.  pp.  882, 883,  cry  out,  '  how  is  the  faithful  city  be- 
and  b.  12,  ch.  xix.  come  a  h.\rlot.'  "     Ibid,  p.  148,  Cor. 

We  might  fill  a  volume  with  similar  of  Ch.  of  Rome, 
sentiments.     How,  for  instance,  does  Again,  "  I   verily  believe  they 

Bishop  Bull,  in  his  Vindication  of  tiie  are    in    great    danger   that  live 

Church  of  England,  expose  the  errors  in  her  communion."     Ibid,  p.  151. 
and    corruptions   of   the    Church    ol 


372  PIIELATISTS    ENVIRONED    WITH    DIFFICULTIES.       [LECT.  XV. 

as  an  external  efficacious  source  of  episcopal  grace  and  power, 
then  how  was  this  inheritance  conveyed,  when  the  church  was 
itself  Arian,  and  believed  in  no  Holy  Ghost,  but  denied  Him  ;  and 
when  it  hiid  fallen  into  idolatry,  and  rejected  nearly  the  whole 
doctrines  of  Christianity  ?  A  title  to  external  office  might,  even 
under  such  difficulties,  be  easily  conveyed  ;  but  how  inward 
and  personal  qualities,  and  that  too  in  such  circumstances,  could 
be  possibly  transmitted,  it  is  not  easy  to  understand.  And  yet  the 
belief  of  this  is  what  is  made  to  be  "  of  the  substance  of  the 
faith,"  and  essential  to  covenanted  mercy. 

If  the  prelatic  order  consists  merely  in  its  dignity  and  external 
functions,  then  it  can  communicate  no  internal  grace  or  effica- 
cious pov/er.  And  if  its  virtue  consists  in  this  inward  grace, 
then  the  absurdity  and  the  impossibility  of  this  pretension  stares  us 
in  the  face,  for  how  could  this  spiritual  and  divine  grace  be  trans- 
missible, and  transmissible  through  a  foul  and  graceless  channel  ?' 

If  it  is  said,  as  it  is,  that  the  power  of  the  Holy  Ghost  is  as- 
suredly given  by  the  imposition  of  prelatic  hands, ^  then  another 
absurdity  arises  ;  for  it  is  manifest  that  he,  who  by  this  manipula- 
tion "  receives  the  Holy  Ghost,'"  has  previously  been  made  to 
declare  that  "he  is  truly  called  according  to  the  will  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ ; "  that  is,  that  he  has  already  received  the  Holy 
Ghost  —  for  by  this  it  is,  that  Christ  now  calls  his  servants  unto 
his  ministry.  And  thus  is  the  recipient  of  prelatical  ordination, 
at  one  and  the  same  time,  made  to  declare  his  belief  that  he  has 
already  received,  and  that  he  then  receives  the  Holy  Ghost,  and 
a  consequent  call  to  the  work  of  the  ministry. 

But  again.  In  the  Oxford  tracts,*  it  is  correctly  shown,  that 
if  the  validity  and  the  consequent  benefits  of  the  sacraments  de- 
pend on  the  design  of  their  administrator,  there  would  be  no  con- 
fidence to  any  penitent  that  he  had  ever  received  them  in  truth. 
Now  with  tenfold  strength  we  urge,  that  if  the  validity  of  the  sa- 
craments depends  on  a  regular  unbroken  line  of  successors  to  the 

1)  See  this  made  good  in  Jack-  will  remember,  supplies  fult,  war- 
Bon,  vol.  iii.  pp.  876,  878,  880.  rant  for   this    interpretation,  by 

2)  Tiiat  ihe  Holy  Ghost  is  actu-  directing  the  same  phrase  to  be  sol- 
ally  and  truly  given,  according  to  this  einnly  repeated  at  the  consecration  of 
doctrine,  by  the  imposition  of  the  every  bishop.  Remember,  that  thou 
hands  of  prelates,  however  notorious-  stir  up  the  grace  of  God  which  is 
ly  infidel  and  immoral  the  recij)ient3  given  thee  by  this  imposition  of 
may  be,  is  distinctly  taught.  Thus,  our  hands."  On  Primitive  Tradition, 
as  to  the  former,  Mr.  Keble  says, "  St.  ed.  4th,  p.  43  ;  see  also  Palmer  on  the 
Paul  speaks  of  the  Holy  Ghost  dwell-  Ch.  vol.  iii.  p.  431. 

ing  in  us,  i.  e.  in  himself  and  Timothy  ;  3)  See  the  Form  for  the  Ordaining 

and  how  it  had    passed  from  him  to  of  Priests. 
Timothy,    by  the    imposition    of  his  4)  Vol.  i.  p  36. 

hands.     The  Church  of  England,  you 


LECT.  XV.]     PRELATISTS  ENCOUNTER  FURTHER  DIFFICULTIES.  373 

apostles,  "  whose  authority  to  confer  the  gifts  of  the  spirit  is  de- 
rived originally  from  the  laying  on  of  the  hands  of  the  apostles 
themselves ;"' — then  it  is  most  clearly  impossible  for  any  christian 
now,  or  ever  after,  to  have  any  assurance  that  he  has  partaken, 
or  that  he  can  truly  "  partake,  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ." 

And  if  a  hope  of  covenanted  mercy  is  necessary  to  christian 
faith,  and  peace,  and  joy,  then  since  this  hope,  on  these  princi- 
ples, is  imparted  only  by  the  true  prelatical  successors  of  the 
apostles  ;  and  since  no  human  being  can  be  certain  that  his  min- 
isters and  their  predecessors,  up  to  the  time  of  the  apostles,  were 
in  every  respect  their  true  successors,  and  qualified  to  act  in 
their  name  ;  no  human  being  can,  in  life  or  in  death,  cherish  a 
well-grounded  or  comfortable  hope  of  eternal  life.** 

Another  consequence  of  this  doctrine, — by  which  the  poisoned 
chalice  prepared  for  the  destruction  of  others,  is  shown  to  con- 
vey death  to  them  by  whom  it  was  prepared — is,  that  by  making 
the  efficacy  of  all  ordinances  to  depend  on  prelates,  who  by  vir- 
tue of  their  lineal  succession,  are  able  to  convey  the  necessary 
grace  ;3  they  most  effectually  becloud  the  certainty  of  any  valid 
administration  of  them  within  their  own  bounds.  For  as  in  all 
ages,  there  have  been  multiplied  cases  of  baptism  where  no  such 
transmission  of  "episcopal  grace"  could  take  place  ;  so  are  we 
informed  that"  "  half  the  existing  hierarchy  in  America  have  had 
their  baptism  and  education  from  dissent ;  "  which  baptism  is  of 
necessity  no  baptism,  so  far  as  any  prelatic  efficacy  or  validity 
has  been  conferred  upon  it.  But  upon  the  validity  of  baptism, 
rests  the  validity  of  all  subsequent  orders,  which  must,  of  course, 
to  be  of  any  value,  be  grafted  on  a  good  tree,  springing  from  a 
good  root ;  and  hence  it  cannot  by  possibility  be  shown,  on  this 
theory,  that  there  is  a  validly  ordained  minister  in  any  existing 
hierarchy  in  the  world.  Thus  are  these  "  conspirators  "^  against 
the  privileges  and  rights  of  others  —  to  use  their  own  words  — 
blown  up  by  their  own  treasonable  plot. 

That  the  christian  ministry  is  of  divine  institution  we  believe, 

1)  See  ibid.  ordinances  at  the  hands  of  the  duly 

2)  "  Let     it   be    thy    supreme  authorized  priesthood,  is  the  in- 
CARE,  O  my  soul  "  —  snch  is  the  Ian-  dispensable    condition    of    salva- 

fuawe  which  Bishop  Hobart  puts,  in  tion,  except  in  cases  of  io-norawce,  i«- 

is  Companion  to  the  Altar,  into  the  vincible  prejudice,  impeii'ect  reasoning, 

mouth  of  the  communicant,  —  "  to  re-  and  mistaken  judgment." 
ceive   the   blessed   sacrament  of  the  3)  See  e.  g.  Potter  on  Ch.  Govt, 

body  and  blood  of  the  Saviour,  only  pp.  236,  230,  &c. 
FROM  the  hands  of  those  who  de-  4)    Quoted    from    an    American 

rive  their  authority  by  regular  trans-  Episc.  author,  in  British  Critic,  Oct. 

mission  from  Christ."     "  Where  the  1839,  p.  308. 
gospel  is  proclaimed,  communion  with  5)  Mr.  Newman, 

the  church,  by  the  participation  of  its 


374  PRELACY    UTTERLY   REPUDIATED.  [lECT.    XV. 

and  that  ordinarily  the  right  to  enter  upon  it  is  avouched  by 
ordination,  we  also  believe  ;  —  and  that  there  ever  has  been  and 
will  be  a  succession  of  ministers,  is  also  a  part  of  our  faith. — 
But  that  this  ministry  is  dependent  for  its  existence,  on  an  order 
of  prelates ;  and  that  its  efficacy  flows  through  their  consecration ; 
and  that  their  power  to  bestow  this  all-important  gift,  is  deter- 
mined by  the  fact  of  an  unbroken  lineal  succession  of  such 
prelates  ;  —  all  this  we  regard  as  most  perfectly  visionary. 

We  repudiate  it  as  antichristian  —  as  no  part  of  Christ's 
ordinance,^  and  as  without  any  authority  from  Him,  whose  min- 
isters and  ambassadors  we  are.  Our  ministry  we  have  received 
through  prelatists,  but  not  of,  by,  or  from,  them.  To  them  we 
attribute  no  other  virtue  than  as  conveyancers  of  a  divine  institu- 
tion, whose  efficacy  comes  —  and  comes  solely  —  from  a  divine 
power.  SCRIPTURE  EPISCOPACY  is  PRESBYTERY, 
and  SCRIPTURE  BISHOPS  ARE  PRESBYTERS.  As 
presbyters  we  acknowledge  and  receive  prelates,  and  the  minis- 
try from  them,  as  the  custodiers  of  this  sacred  office  ;  but  what- 
ever they  claim  more  than  this,  cometh  not  from  above  —  it  is 
an  usurpation  —  and  is  perfectly  null  and  void,  except  as  to  its 
criminality.  We  do  not  regard  existing  prelates  as  antichris- 
tian —  although  prelacy,  in  all  beyond  presbytery,  we  must 
regard  as  one  branch  of  sacerdotal  and  unchristian  assumption  — 
"  the  stairs  and  way  to  anti-christianity"  by  which  it  has  as- 
cended, and  may  again  ascend  to  power,  —  "rather  than  anti- 
christianity  itself."'  It  is  because  they  have  thus  preserved  the 
substance  of  the  ministry  we  recognize  prelates  at  all.  —  As  for 
this  challenged  superiority  of  prelatic  jurisdiction,  we  know  it 
not.  —  It  is  a  nullity,  contrary  to  the  sense  of  the  early  English 
church  —  to  the  laws  of  England  —  to  the  testimony  of  most 
learned  Romish  divines  —  and  to  the  judgment  of  the  best  writers 
and  churches  all  the  world  over.*  To  rest  the  claims  of  any 
ministry  to  the  respect,  confidence,  and  honor  of  the  people,  or 
to  a  divine  institution,  on  this  doctrine  of  succession,  as  do 
high-church  prelatists  in  and  out  of  Rome,  in  England  and  in 
America ;  is  most  assuredly  to  destroy  their  claims  to  any  respect 
whatever,  with  an  utter  destruction.  It  is  the  opinion  of  Mr. 
Faber,  certainly  one  of  the  most  learned  divines  of  the  present 
English  church,  and  a  firm  believer  in  three  orders,  and  which 
opinion  he  sustains  by  incontrovertible  arguments,  that  "  it  may 
perhaps  endanger  the  whole  system  of  apostolical  successionj  if 

1)  See  Divine  Right  of  the  Min-      ell.      See  Divine  Right  of  the  Minis- 
istry,  p.  26,  pt.  ii.  1654.  try,  pt.  ii.  pp.  18,  22. 

2)  See  this  fully  shown  in  Pow- 


LECT.  XV.]  PRELATIC   BIGOTRY   AND    CRIMINALITY.  375 

we  rigidly  insist  upon  the  absolute  necessity  of  a  transmission 
through  the  medium  of  bishops  (i.  e.  prelates)  exclusively.'" 
"It  is  most  evident,"  says  Dr.  Field,  a  writer  of  "the  very 
highest  authority"  with  these  high-church  theologues,  "  that, 
that  wherein  a  bishop  (prelate)  excelleth  a  presbyter  is  not  a 
distinct  power,  or  order,  but  an  eminency  and  dignity  only, 
specially  yielded  to  one  above  all  the  rest  of  the  same  rank, 
for  order  sake  and  to  preserve  the  unity  of  the  church."* 

To  pronounce  a  sentence  of  excommunication  upon  presby- 
terians,  and  all  other  of  the  reformed  churches,  —  which  being 
reformed,  are  not  therefore  new,  or  novel  churches,  but  the  pre- 
existing and  deformed  churches  made  better  —  because  they 
reject  prelacy ;  is,  we  must  say,  an  outrageous  violence  done  to 
reason,  scripture,  charity,  and  Christianity  ;  and  "doth  more  ad- 
vance and  honor  antichrist,  than  it  doth  disparage  or  disgrace 
us."*     Such  a  judgment  is  self-condemned. 

There  are  three  species  under  the  genus  bishop.  There  is 
the  scripture  bishop,  which  is  a  presbyter.  There  is  the  primi- 
tive bishop,  which  is  a  presbyter  acting  as  constant  moderator 
or  president.  And  there  is  the  prelatic  bishop,  of  the  after  age  — 
the  lordly  claimant  to  the  succession  of  apostolic  jurisdiction, 
over  the  only  bishops  known  to  the  word  of  God.  Now  we 
challenge  the  whole  bench  to  show  any  sufScient  authority  for 
this  third  species  in  scripture,  or  in  the  first  two  centuries,  — 
the  diocesan,  prelatical  successor  of  apostles,  occupying  his 
order  a§  peculiar,  supreme,  and  by  divine  right.^ 

1)  Faber's  Albigenses,  pp.  553-^  demand,  if  the  church  of  Christ  Be 
562.  (as  they  affirm)  but  one,  and  that  those 

2)  Field  of  the  Church,  lib.  iii.  who  refuse  communion  with  it,  cut 
cap.  39.  themselves  off  from  it,  whether  the 

3)  Div.  Right  of  Min.  p.  30.  Romish  bishops  were  at  the  time  of 

4)  See  on  this  threefold  distinc-  the  reformation  bishops  or  not .''  If 
tion,  and  the  whole  subject,  the  Altare  they  were,  the  protestants,  by  separat- 
Damascenum,  Davidia  Calderwood,  ing  from  them,  and  by  setting  up  a 
Lugd.  1708,  p.  83,  &c.  communion  in  opposition  to  them,  be- 

5)  "  If  1  were  worthy  to  advise  came  schismatics,  and  thereby  cut 
some  people,"  says  the  author  of  themselves  off  from  this  one  church ; 
"The  Rights  of  the  Chris.  Church,"  since  two  opposite  communions, 
(Lond.  1707,  ed.  3d,  pp.  316,  317,  &c.)  as  the  clergy  on  all  sides  hold, 
"  I  would  desire  them  not  to  act  like  cannot  be  both  ministers  of  the 
the  executioners  of  the  three  children,  same  church  ;  and  if  one  is  a  member 
in  venturing  to  burn  themselves,  that  of  the  true  church,  the  other  cannot 
they  might  be  sure  to  throw  others  far  be  so  too  ;  and  a  false  church  is  no 
enough  into  the  fire  ;  and  that  they  church,  at  least  of  Christ ;  and  conse- 
would  no  more  attack  the  dissenters  quently  the  protestant  bishops  cannot 
on  such  principles  as  unchurch  all  be  governors  in  the  church  of  Christ, 
who  departed  from  Rome,  those  who  because  ecclesiastical  headship  sup- 
have  as  well  as  those  who  have  not  poses  a  union  with  the  body,  and  they 
bishops.  In  order  to  prove  this  the  who  break  that  union  must  destroy 
consequence  of  their  principles,  I  here  any  headship,  power,  or  authority  they 


376 


PRELATIC   JUDGMENT   NOT   DECISIVE.  [lECT.   XV. 


We  must,  however,  plead  against  false  testimony  ;  or  the  dog- 
matic interpretation  of  the  testimony  given,  in  a  prelatic  sense  ;  — 
or  the  ex  parte  decision  of  these  intolerant  hierarchs,  sitting  in 
conclave,  with  closed  doors,  the  laity  and  the  clergy  being  disal- 
lowed to  speak  ; — as  not  the  voice  of  the  church  ;  as  most  insuffi- 
cient authority  ;  and  as  nothing  more  nor  less  than  the  judg- 
ment of  the  usurper  upon  his  own  claims.  But  of  this,  more 
again. 


had  before  over  the  body,  or  any  part 
of  it,  since  by  their  schism  they  cease 
to  belong  to  the  body." 

"  On  the  contrary,  if  the  Romish 
church,  at  any  time  before  the  refor- 
mation, ceased  to  be  a  true  church, 
they  ceased  to  have  a  right  to  those 
privileges  belonging  to  it,  of  which 
the  receiving  and  conveying  spiritual 
power  or  government  is  on  all  sides 
allowed  to  be  one  ;  and  consequently, 
they  were  incapable  of  bestowing  any 
on  the  protestant  bishops." 

In  an  article  on  the  apostolical 
succession,  in  the  London  Christian 


Observer,  (for  1838,  App.  p.  820,)  it 
is  said,  "  But  in  repreiiending  the 
popish  abuse  of  the  doctrine  of  apos- 
tolical succession,  we  would  ever  keep 
in  mind  its  sober  and  scriptural  in- 
terpretation ;  for  never  can  we  ques- 
tion that  our  Divine  Lord  has  always 
had  a  church,  and  that  our  portion  of 
it  is  of  apostolical  lineage.  But  the 
Romanists' view  of  the  doctrine  is  su- 
perstitious and  unwarranted  by  Holy 
Writ ;  and  when  espoused  by  any 
professed  member  of  the  Church  of 
England,  it  is  also  as  suicidal  as 

IT    IS    UNSCRIPTURAL." 


LECTURE  XVI. 


THE  PRELATICAL  DOCTRINE  OF  APOSTOLICAL  SUCCESSION  CONTRARY 
TO  THE  MORE  APPROVED  AND  CHARITABLE  JUDGMENT  OF  THE 
ENGLISH   AND    AMERICAN    CHURCHES. 

Having  dwelt  upon  the  unreasonableness  of  this  prelatic  doc- 
trine of  apostolical  succession,  we  are  prepared  to  show  that  it 
has  been  rejected  in  whole  or  in  part,  by  many  of  the  best  di- 
vines of  the  English  church  ;  and  that  it  is  not,  in  the  judgment 
of  a  large  portion  of  it,  to  be  regarded  as  the  established  doctrine 
of  that  church. 

We  are  indeed  told  by  Mr.  Vagan,  in  a  statement  authenti- 
cated by  Dr.  Hook,  that  "  one  of  the  falsehoods  propagated 
in  these  days  is,  that  the  reformers  did  not  hold  the  divine  right 
of  episcopacy,  (prelacy,)  but  that  this  doctrine  was  subsequently 
introduced.'"  In  support  of  this  bold  assertion,  he  alleges  that 
in  a  certain  conference  with  Romanists,  a  certain  Dean  Horn 
"  observed  that  the  apostles'  authority  is  derived  upon  after  ages, 
and  conveyed  to  the  bishops,  their  successors."*  He  then  men- 
tions the  authority  of  Bishop  Hutton,  as  the  only  other  ground 
of  evidence,  on  which  to  convict  the  true  friends  of  the  church, 
and  of  the  cause  of  Christ,  of  the  heinous  charge  of  falsehood. 

Now  as  we  have  been  obliged,  "  in  all  conscience,"  and  as 
we  believe,  "  in  all  charity,"  with  no  hatred  or  malice  towards 
any  individuals,  to  speak  strongly  in  reprehension  of  this  theo- 
retic doctrine,  as  being  in  its  necessary  tendency  in  all  time  to 
come,  and  in  its  actual  developements  in  all  time  past,  evil  and 
greatly  evil  — we  would  gladly  incur  the  wrath  of  such  zealots  for 
the  "  sacred  order,"  if  we  could  be  instrumental  in  wiping  off 
from  one  of  the  stars,  which  shone  in  the  bright  banner  of  the 

1)  Hook's   Call   to   (dis)  Union,  2)  Ibid,  p.  107. 

p.  106,  Am.  Ed. 

48 


378  WE    REPROBATE    PRELACY NOT    EPISCOPACY.       [l.ECT.  XVI. 

reformation,  this  foul  and  dishonoring  stain.  We  would,  in  this 
way,  hope  to  give  further  evidence,  that  our  purpose,  in  this 
cause,  is  defensive,  and  not  offensive  —  that  our  opposition  is  to 
prelacy,  and  not  to  episcopacy — to  that  popish  figment  whose 
absence  could  in  naught  deteriorate  the  character  or  claims  of 
the  protestant  episcopal  church,  but  whose  presence  must  iden- 
tify her  with  Romanism,  even  as  the  soul  gives  unity  to  the 
changed  elements  of  the  body ;  and  which  must  thus  gather 
around  her  all  the  odium  of  intolerance  in  principle,  if  not  in 
practice.  This  doctrine,  then,  we  believe  and  declare  to  be  sep- 
arable from  episcopacy,  as  even  its  abettors  allow.  Should  we 
fail  in  giving  proof  sufficient  to  establish  the  truth  of  what  is  here 
called  a  falsehood,  then  we  can  only  regret,  that  in  very  deed, 
such  an  aspersion  should  fairly  be  accredited  to  a  church,  towards 
which,  so  far  as  she  permits,  we  would  ever  reciprocate  the  most 
fraternal  regard. 

The  editors  of  the  London  Christian  Observer,  the  periodi- 
cal of  the  evangelical  portion  of  the  English  episcopal  church, 
in  a  review  of  a  recent  work,  by  a  trained  soldier  of  the  Oxford 
band,^  thus  present  the  argument,  and  in  a  way  which  may  be 
more  satisfactory  than  were  the  same  language  employed  by  an 
excommunicated  alien  from  the  chosen  commonwealth. 

"  Amongst  the  first  and  most  momentous  in  its  consequences, 
of  Mr.  Gladstone's  deflections  from  the  truth,  is  the  assumption 
of  what  is  styled  apostolical  succession,  as  absolutely,  and  un- 
der all  possible  circumstances,  necessary  to  the  validity  of  the 
ministerial  commission.  We  do  not  derogate  from  the  impor- 
tance of  the  regular  transmision  of  the  sacerdotal  commission  ; 
but  in  what  paragraph  of  the  New  Testament — in  what  au- 
thenticated document  among  the  '  remains  of  the  apostles,  — 
and  most  assuredly  we  may  add,  in  what  article  or  homily  of 
the  Church  of  England,  is  it  enjoined,  asserted,  or  intimated, 
that  no  man,  under  any  possible  circumstances,  can  lawfully  ad- 
minister the  christian  sacraments,  and  exercise  the  christian  min- 
istry, unless  in  the  order  of  a  lineal  episcopal  succession  from 
some  one  of  the  apostles,  to  the  individual  who  conferred  his 
commission  upon  him  ?  With  regard  to  our  own  church,  its 
most  distinct  and  pertinent  announcement  is  contained  in  the 
Twenty-third  Article,  which  simply  declares  that  those  persons 
are  to  be  judged  as  lawfully  called  to  the  ministry,  who  have 
been  chosen  and  sent  by  men  who  have  public  authority  given 
unto  them  in  the  congregation,  to  call  and  send  ministers  into 
the  Lord's  vineyard.  The  purport  of  this  declaration,  Bishop 
Burnet  describes  as  follows,  under  the  head  of  this  Article  :  — 

1)  Mr.  Gladstone's  State  in  its  Relations  to  tlie  Church. 


LECT.  XVI.]       BISHOP    BURNEt's    SENSE    OF    THE    ARTICLES.  379 

"  The  definition  here  given  of  those  that  are  lawfully  called 
and  sent,  is  put  in  very  general  words,  far  from  that  magisterial 
stiffness  in  which  some  (the  Nonjurors,  fee.,)  have  taken  upon 
them  to  dictate  in  this  matter.  The  article  does  not  resolve  this 
into  any  particular  constitution,  but  leaves  the  matter  xjpen  and 
at  large  for  such  accidents  as  had  happened,  and  such  as  might 
still  happen.  Those  who  drew  it  had  the  state  of  the  several 
churches  before  their  eyes  that  had  been  differently  reformed  ; 
and  although  their  own  had  been  less  forced  out  of  the  beaten 
path  than  any  other,  yet  they  knew  that  all  things  among  them- 
selves had  not  gone  according  to  those  rules  that  ought  to  be 
sacred  in  regular  times  ;  necessity  has  no  law,  and  is  a  law  un- 
to itself." 

"  That  which  is  simply  necessary  as  a  means  to  preserve  the 
order  and  union  of  the  body  of  christians,  and  to  maintain  the 
reverence  due  to  holy  things,  is,  that  no  man  enter  upon  any 
part  of  the  holy  ministry,  without  he  be  chosen  and  called  to  it 
by  such  as  have  an  authority  so  to  do ;  that,  I  say,  is  fixed  by 
the  article  ;  but  men  are  left  more  at  liberty  as  to  their  thoughts 
concerning  the  subject  of  his  lawful  authority." 

"  That  which  we  believe  to  be  lawful  autliority  is,  that  rule 
which  the  body  of  the  pastors,  or  bishops  and  clergy  of  a  church, 
shall  settle,  being  met  in  a  body  under  the  due  respect  to  the 
powers  that  God  shall  set  over  them  ;  rules  thus  made  being  in 
nothing,  contrary  to  the  word  of  God,  and  duly  executed  by  the 
particular  persons  to  whom  that  care  belongs,  are  certainly  the 
lawful  authority." 

"The  bishop  touches  more  directly  upon  the  case  of  the  for- 
eign protestant  churches,  as  follows  :  — 

"  If  a  company  of  christians  find  the  public  worship  where 
they  live,  to  be  so  defiled,  that  they  cannot,  with  a  good  con- 
science, join  in  it ;  and  if  they  do  not  know  of  any  place  to  which 
they  can  conveniently  go,  where  they  may  worship  God  purely, 
and  in  a  regular  way  ;  if,  I  say,  such  a  body  finding  some  that 
have  been  ordained,  though  to  the  lower  function,  should  submit 
itself  entirely  to  their  conduct,  or,  finding  none  of  those,  should, 
by  a  common  consent,  desire  some  of  their  own  number  to  min- 
ister to  them  in  holy  things ;  and  should,  upon  that  beginning, 
grow  up  to  a  regulated  constitution  ;  though  we  are  very  sure, 
that  this  is  quite  out  of  all  rule,  and  could  not  be  done  without 
a  very  great  sin,  unless  the  necessity  were  great  and  apparent ; 
yet  if  the  necessity  is  real,  and  not  feigned,  this  is  not  con- 
demned or  annulled  by  the  article  ;  for  when  this  grows  to  a 
constitution,  and  when  it  was  begun  by  the  consent  of  a  body 
who  are  supposed  to  have  an  authority  in  such  an  extraordina- 


380  CONDEMNED    BY    THE    CHRISTIAN    OBSERVER.  [lECT.  XVI. 

ry  case  ;  whatever  some  hotter  spirits  have  thought  of  this  since 
that  time,  yet  we  are  very  sure,  that  not  only  those  who  penned 
the  articles,  but  the  body  of  the  church  for  above  half  an  age  after, 
did,  notwithstanding  those  irregularities,  acknowledge  the  for- 
eign churches  so  constituted,  to  be  true  churches,  as  to  all  the 
essentials  of  a  church,  though  they  had  been  at  first  irregularly 
formed,  and  continued  still  to  be  in  an  imperfect  state.  And 
therefore  the  general  words  in  which  this  part  of  the  article  is 
framed,  seem  to  have  been  designed  on  purpose  not  to  exclude 
them." 

"  We  do  not  say  that  this  statement  of  Bishop  Burnet's,  or  any 
other  hypothesis,  is  free  from  difficulties  ;  but  the  most  incredi- 
ble of  all  the  contending  opinions  is,  that  there  is  not  a  church, 
a  sacrament,  or  a  christian,  in  any  nation,  except  as  connected 
with  episcopal  ordination  and  government,  demonstrably  trans- 
mitted in  uninterrupted  succession  from  the  apostles.  Indepen- 
dently of  other  insuperable  difficulties,  and  monstrous 
CONSEQUENCES,  involvcd  in  the  popish  (i.  e.  the  high-churchy 
view  of  the  apostolical  succession,  —  such  as  the  uncertainty 
and  profound  obscurity  which  envelope  some  of  the  links  of  the 
chain  of  transmission,  and  the  foul  impurities,  both  doctrinal  and 
practical,  which  exhibit  many  others  in  disgraceful  prominence, 
together  with  the  absolute  expulsion  of  the  greatly  larger  pro- 
portion of  protestant  Europe  out  of  the  pale  of  christian  broth- 
erhood, there  is  one  so  portentous,  that  nothing  short  of  the 
most  irrefragable  scriptural  demonstration,  could  sustain  a  theo- 
ry which  implies  it ;  we  mean  the  insuperable  difficulty  inter- 
posed in  the  way  of  reforming  or  remodelling  a  corrupt  church. 
If,  as  Mr.  Gladstone  states,  in  language  to  us  scarcely  intelligi- 
ble, the  church,  as  embodied  in  its  rulers,  is  '  an  inheritance 
not  merely  of  antiquity,  but  also  of  inspiration,'  how  is  it  to 
be  brought  back  to  purity  when  it  has  diverged  from  it  ?  It  is 
this  very  doctrine  of  alleged  infallibility  in  connexion  with  ec- 
clesiastical lineage,  that  renders  the  church  of  Rome  impervi- 
ous to  reformation.  It  may  be  said,  and  truly,  that  the  provi- 
dence of  God  is  pledged  for  the  security  of  his  church,  and 
that  from  its  corrupt  ranks  he  can,  and  will  raise  up  holy  men, 
who  shall  trim  the  lamp  when  it  becomes  dim,  and  supply  oil 
when  it  seemed  almost  expiring  ;  and  thankful  we  are  to  say, 
that,  at  the  period  of  the  reformation,  he  did  so  in  our  ow^n  land, 
by  inclining  the  hearts  of  Cranmer,  and  Latimer,  and  Ridley, 
and  other  bishops  and  pastors  of  the  church,  to  perform  the 
work  of  reformation.  But  even  in  England,  the  great  majority 
of  the  popish  bishops  were  hostile  to  amendment ;  so  that,  had 
not  other  influences  interposed,  the  reformation  could  not  have 

1)  See  this  decl.irfKl  on  p.  380,  by  this  work. 


LECT.  XVI.]      THE    SENSE    OF    THE    ARTICLES    AND    CANONS.  381 

been  accomplished.  In  France,  Italy,  Spain,  and  most  other 
parts  of  the  Continent,  it  was  absolutely  prevented  ;  and  in 
Germany  and  Switzerland,  it  was  effected  only  by  rudely  snap- 
ping the  chain  of  episcopal  succession.  God,  we  know,  can, 
and  will  protect  his  church ;  but  before  we  can  presume  on  an 
immediate  interposition  from  above,  to  prevent  the  consequences 
of  human  ignorance  and  depravity,  we  must  be  assured  that  the 
theory  which  would  require  an  interference  out  of  the  ordinary 
course  of  his  providence,  is  of  divine  institution,  and  that  no 
other  remedy  is  capable  of  meeting  the  exigency  of  the  case. 
We  would  not  treat  lightly  the  evils  of  deranging  a  well-arranged 
ecclesiastical  system ;  and  we  rejoice  that,  in  our  own  country, 
the  reformation  was  effected  under  the  enlightened  and  prudent 
superintendence  of  the  rulers  of  the  church.  We  are  merely 
exposing  a  theory  which  is  not  only  destitute  of  all 

SCRIPTURAL  BASIS,  BUT  IS  IN  REALITY  PREGNANT  WITH  CON- 
SEQ,UENCES   THAT  FALL  NOTHING   SHORT  OF  THE  WORST  ABUSES 

OF  PAPAL  DESPOTISM.  The  rights  and  privileges  of  the  priest- 
hood, when  justly  exercised,  are  to  be  held  in  reverence  ;  but 
the  line  of  succession  in  the  church  was  designed  to  be  a  bond 
of  order,  not  an  instrument  of  tyranny  and  corruption ;  and  if, 
in  escaping  from  the  accumulated  mass  of  human  depravity, 
the  foreign  reformers  wrenched  the  chain,  and  fastened  it  afresh 
into  the  rock  of  scriptural  truth,  we  have  no  more  doubt  of  its 
firmness,  than  we  have  of  the  Queen  of  England's  right  to  the 
throne,  and  of  her  judges  to  administer  the  laws,  because  of 
disruptions  during  the  heptarchy,  or  the  wars  of  the  Roses,  or 
when  James  was  expelled  from  his  kingdom." 

Such  is  the  language  and  testimony  of  this  able  and  widely 
extended  organ  of  the  evangelical  "  members  of  the  established 
church  "  in  England. 

The  eighteenth  of  the  Thirty -nine  Articles,  pronounces  those 
accursed  who  presume  to  "  say  that  every  man  shall  be  saved  by 
the  sect  or  law  which  he  professeth  ;  since  there  is  salvation 
only  through  Christ.'"  Now  if  the  name  of  Christ  is  the  only 
way  of  salvation  —  and  if  salvation  through  him,  can  be  obtained 
without  the  pale,  and  beyond  the  gift  of  prelatic  successionists, 
—  are  not  they  here  pronounced  accursed,  who  presume  to  say 
that  covenanted  salvation  can  be  obtained  only  by  the  sect  of  the 
hereditary  successionists  ;  and  who  profess  to  believe  this  to  be 
the  one  and  only  way,  or  medium  of  salvation  ? 

The  fifty-fifth  canon  clearly  recognizes  the  membership  of 
other  churches.     It  is  as  follows : 

1)  See  Blunt  on  the  39  Art.  pp.  121,  124.     Eng.  Ed. 


082  UNDENIABLE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  ENGLISH  CHURCH.    [lECT.  XVI. 

"  Ye  shall  pray  for  Christ's  holy  catholic  church  ;  that  is,  for 
the  whole  congregation  of  christian  people  dispersed  through- 
out the  whole  world,  and  especially  for  the  churches  of  England, 
Scotland,  and  Ireland,  &c."' 

To  these  evidences  may  be  added  the  thirtieth  canon,  of  1603, 
which  says,  "  The  abuse  of  a  thing  doth  not  take  away  the  law- 
ful use  of  it.  Nay,  so  far  was  it  from  the  purpose  of  the 
Church  of  England  to  forsake  and  reject  the  churches  of  Italy, 
France,  Spain,  Germany,  or  any  such  like  churches,  in  all 
things  which  they  held  and  practised,  that  as  the  apology  of  the 
Church  of  England  confesseth,  it  doth  with  reverence  retain  those 
ceremonies  which  do  neither  endanger  the  church  of  God  nor 
offend  the  minds  of  men,"  &£c. 

Dr.  Holland,  king's  professor  of  divinity  at  Oxford,  says  "  that 
to  affirm  the  office  of  bishop  to  be  different  from  that  of  presby- 
ter, and  superior  to  it,  (and  therefore  essential  to  a  church,)  is 
most  false ;  contrary  to  scripture,  to  the  fathers,  to  the  doctrines 
of  the  Church  of  England,  and  to  the  schoolmen  themselves.'"' 

It  has  been  already  seen,^  that  the  book  of  orders  up  to  the 
year  1662,  appropriated  to  presbyters,  and  to  them  peculiarly, 
the  only  commission  given  by  Christ  for  a  christian  ministry  at 
all ;  —  and  also  the  promises  of  Christ's  perpetual  presence, 
which  are  now  supposed  to  secure  all  apostolic  power.  This 
book  further  enjoined  that  presbyters,  with  the  bishop,   "  shall 

LAY  THEIR  HANDS   SEVERALLY    UpOH    the    head     OF    EVERY     ONE 

that  receiveth  the  order  of  priesthood."  And  hence  it  is 
most  evident  that  the  Church  of  England,  up  to  the  year  1662, 
did  most  solemnly  attest  her  belief  that  presbyters  were  the 
proper  successors  of  the  apostles,  and  that  there  could  be  no 
valid  ordination  without  a  presbytery,  and  apart  from  presbyters ; 
bishops  having  no  peculiar  power  of  ordination,  nor  any  right  to 
ordain  alone.  It  is  also  remarkable,  as  a  further  illustration  of 
this  truth,  that  anciently,  rectors,  Sic.  were  (though  presbyters) 
actually  denominated  prelates.* 

Besides,  by  the  constitution  of  the  English  church,  archdea- 
cons, deans,  &c.  in  their  peculiars,  "  to  the  great  blemish  of  our 
reformed  church,"  as  Bishop  Gibson  thinks,*  "  exercise  episco- 
pal jurisdiction  of  all  kinds,  independent  from  the  bishops." 
And  yet  these  are  not  prelates,  but  only  presbyters. 

1)  That  our  interpretation  of  this  3)  See  Lect.  vi.  p.  13.'5. 

canon   is  correct,  see    declared  by  a  4)  See    Johnson's    Clergyman's 

correspondent,  and  also   by  the  edi-  Vade    Mecuin,  vol.  i.   pp.  183,  212, 

tors  of  the  London  Christian  Obs.  for  edit.  4th,  in  Powell,  p.  14.S. 
1838,  p.  819.  5)  Codex  Juris.  Eccl.  Anglic,  p 

2)  Dwight's   Theol.    vol.    v.  p.  22  in  Foster's  Exam,  of  p.  10. 
10. 


LECT.  XVI.]    UNDENIABLE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  ENGLISH  CHURCH.  383 

Chancellors,  also,  of  whom  Dr.  Ridley  says/  they  "  are  equal 
or  nearly  equal  in  time,  to  bishops  themselves  ;  yea,  chancellors 
are  so  necessary  officers  to  bishops,  that  every  bishop  must  of 
necessity  have  a  chancellor"  —  and  who,  "  as  he  is  the  oculus 
episcopi,  ought  to  have  an  eye  unto  all  parts  of  the  diocese,  and 
hath  immediately  under  the  ordinary,  jurisdiction  in  all  matters 
ecclesiastical  within  the  same  "  —  this  chancellor  may  be  nothing 
more  than  a  layman.* 

As  to  the  words  in  the  ordinal,  which  are  quoted  as  demon- 
strative proof  of  a  claim  of  divine  right.  Professor  Wigglesvvorth 
observes,  that  "  the  words  in  the  ordinal  are  too  slender  a  foun- 
dation to  build  upon  in  the  present  case ;  especially  if  it  be  re- 
membered who  were  the  compilers  of  that  book,  and  what  rea- 
son we  have  to  conclude  that  they  were  of  the  judgment  that 
PRIESTS  and  bishops  are  by  God's  law  one  and  the  same." 
Sober  remarks^  that  the  Church  of  England,  and  its  whole  epis- 
copate, must  trace  up  the  original  of  its  present  constitutional  ex- 
istence to  the  regal  supremacy,  as  exercised  by  her  majesty's 
progenitors,  the  kings  and  queens  of  England  —  commencing 
with  the  infamous  Henry  VIII.  And  that  a  divine  right  is  out  of 
the  question,  is  made  demonstratively  plain  by  Sir  Michael  Foster, 
Kt.,  in  his  Examination  of  Bp.  Gibson's  Codex  Juris.'*  Cran- 
mer  took  out  a  license  to  make  a  metropolitan  visitation,"  and  a 
commission,  also,  during  the  king's  pleasure,  for  conferring 
ORDERS  and  the  exercise  of  all  other  parts  of  archi-episcopal  ju- 
risdiction, in  the  name  of  the  king.®  So  also  did  Bonner  take 
out  his  commission  "to  ordain  within  the  diocese  of  Lon- 
don SUCH  as  he  should  judge  avorthy  of  holy  orders,"  &;c. 

That  there  is  not  an  iota  in  the  creed,  or  in  the  articles  of  this 
church,  which  fairly  holds  forth  this  odious  and  intolerant  doc- 
trine, is  expressly  admitted  by  the  Oxford  tractators  themselves, 
who  regard  the  formularies,  as  on  this  account,  incomplete ;  and 
who  devoutly  long  for  an  opportunity  of  reforming  the  cliurch 
anew,  and  of  branding  with  a  fitting  anathema,  "  this  new  heresy, 
which  denies  the  holy  catholic  church  (that  is,  the  exclusive  claims 
of  the  prelacy )  the  heresy  of  Hoadly  and  others  like  him  ;  "^  and 
we  may  therefore  safely  rank  the  abettors  of  this  extra-ecclesia 

1)  Ridley's  View,  &c.  ed.  1G02,  7)  Oxf.  Tr.  vol.  i.  p.  300.  "  The 
p.  1-56.  name  of  Bishop  Hoadly  will  probably 

2)  37  Henry  viii.  17,  in  Foster's  be  as  long  remembered  as  any  on  the 
Exam.  p.  3d.  list  of  British  worthies  ;  and  will  nev- 

3)  See  in  Dr.  Chauncy's  Appeal  er  be  mentioned  without  veneration 
to  the  Public  Answered,  Boston,  of  the  strength  of  his  abilities,  the  lib- 
17(W,  p.  8.  erality  of  his  sentiments,  ami  his  en- 

4)  Eccl.  Angl.  ed.  3d,  173t)  re-  lightened  zeal  for  civil  liberty."  Bp. 
print,  pp.  13-24,  and  p.  43.  White  on  the  Case  of  the  Episcop.al 

5)  P.  24.  Churches,  1762,  p.  20. 
G)  Ibid,  p.  23. 


3S4  ENGLISH  REFORMERS  CONDEMNED  THIS  DOCTRINE.  [lECT.  XVI. 

doctrine,  under  the  third  class  of  religious  sects  found  in  these 
sectarian  days,  as  it  is  defined  by  these  same  tractators ;  viz. 
"  those  who  hold  more  than  the  truth."' 

The  reformers,  almost  to  a  man,  delivered  sentiments  most 
flatly  contradictory  to  such  an  antichristian  usurpation. 

Wickliffe  "  boldly  declared  that  prelates  were  not  to  be  found 
in  the  Bible  at  all.*  This,  also,  is  asserted  by  the  united  voice 
of  the  framers  of  the  articles,  the  book  of  orders  and  govern- 
ment of  the  Church  of  England,  in  the  *'  Divine  Institution  of 
Bishops  and  Priests."  "Priests  or  bishops,"  say  they,  "had 
this  office,  power,  and  authority,  committed  unto  them  by 
Christ  and  his  apostles."^     This  was  in  1537  or  1538. 

Cranmer  affirms  that  bishops  and  priests  were  both  one  of- 
fice.* Up  to  the  time  of  Charles  the  II.  there  was  no  differ- 
ence, whatever,  as  has  been  stated,  in  the  words  by  which 
bishops  and  presbyters  were  consecrated. 

"  A  considerable  number  of  ministers  were,  in  the  reigns  of 
Edward  VI.,  and  Queen  Elizabeth,  employed  in  the  English 
establishment,  who  had  only  received  presbyterian  ordination  in 
Holland, or  at  Geneva.  Knox,  the  Scotch  reformer;  Whitting- 
ham,  dean  of  Durham  ;  the  learned  Wright,  of  Cambridge ; 
Morrison,  a  Scotch  divine  ;  and  Travers,  chaplain  to  secretary 
Cecil,  and  lecturer  to  the  Temple,  are  among  the  names  which 
first  occur  to  us.  '  All  the  churches  professing  the  gospel,' 
writes  Travers  to  Lord  Treasurer  Burleigh,  *  receive,  likewise, 
to  the  exercise  of  the  ministry  among  them,  all  such  as  have 
been  lawfully  called  before,  in  any  of  the  churches  of  our  con- 
fession. And  in  the  Church  of  England  —  the  same  hath  been 
always  observed  unto  this  day  J*  " 

"  We  know,  also,  that  several  of  the  foreign  reformers  were 
invited  to  England  by  Edward.  Peter  Matyr  had  the  di- 
vinity chair  given  him  at  Oxford.  Bucer  had  the  same  at 
Cambridge ;  while  Ochinus  and  Fagius  had  canonries  in  Eng- 
lish cathedrals.  '  The  reformers,'  says  Neal,  '  admitted  the 
ordination  of  foreign  churches  by  mere  presbyters,  till  towards 
the  middle  of  this  reign,  (Elizabeth,)  when  their  validity  began 
to  be  disputed  and  denied,''  "^ 

By  several  acts  of  parliament  the  ordinations  of  such  as  were 

1)  See  ibid,  p.  265.  glican   church,  one  plain   testimony 

2)  Vaughan's  Life  of,  vol.  ii.  p.  from  Cranmer  and  his  colleagues,  by 
309.  whom   those    instruments  were  con- 

3)  Burnet's  Hist,  of  Ref.  Coll.  of  structed,  ia  worth  all  that  could  be 
Rec.  B.  iii.  Add.  No.  5.  collected  from  the  writings  of  all  the 

4)  "  Who  knows  not,"  asks  Bp.  non-jurors  of  1688,  and  of  those  their 
Mcllvaine,  (Oxf.  Div.  p.  448,)  "  that  contemporaries,  whom  our  Oxford  di- 
in  the  question,  what  is  the  doctrine  vines  are  so  fond  of  quoting?  " 

of  the  articles  and  homilies  of  the  An-  5)  "  Union,''  by  Harris,  p.  151 . 


LECT.  XVI.]   THE  PRACTICE  OF  THE  EARLY  ENGLISH  CHURCH.   385 

ordained  by  presbyters  only,  are  ratified.'  Thus,  also,  in  the 
I3th  of  Plizabeth,  cap.  12,  it  is  enacted,  "  that  every  person 
under  the  degree  of  bishop,  who  doth,  or  shall  pretend  to  be  a 
priest,  or  minister  of  God's  holy  word  and  sacrament,  by  reason 
of  any  other  form  of  institution,  consecration,  or  ordering,  (or- 
daining,)  than  the  form  set  forth  by  parliament,  shall  de- 
clare HIS  ASSENT  and  SUBSCRIBE  the  ARTICLES,"  and  on 
these  conditions  retain  his  orders  and  benefice.  So  also  in  12th 
Caroli.  cap.  17.  By  these  acts,  hundreds  of  ministers,  who 
had  no  more  than  presbyterian  ordination,  or  ordination  by  pres- 
byters alone,  without  the  presence  of  any  bishop,  were 
confirmed,  in  their  livings,  as  true  ministers  of  the  Church  of 
England.  "  No  bishop  in  Scotland,  during  my  stay  in  ihat 
kingdom,"  says  Bishop  Burnet,  "  ever  did  so  much  as  desire 
any  of  the  presbyterians  to  be  re-ordained."*  That  this  was  the 
judgment  of  the  Church  of  England,  as  late  as  the  year  1609, 
will  incontrovertibly  appear  from  the  unexceptionable  testimony 
of  Dr.  Bernard,  the  friend  and  biographer  of  Archbishop 
Usher,  as  given  in  his  collection  of  that  reverend  prelate's 
views,  in  his  work  entitled,  "  The  Judgment  of  the  late  Arch- 
bishop of  Armagh."^  "In  a  word,"  says  he,  "if  the  ordination 
of  presbyters  in  such  places  where  bishops  cannot  be  had, 
were  not  valid,  the  late  bishops  of  Scotland  had  a  hard  task  to 
maintain  themselves  to  be  bishops,  who  were  not  priests,  for 
their  ordination  was  no  other.  And  for  this,  a  passage  in  the 
history  of  Scotland,  wrote  by  the  archbishop  of  St.  Andrews, 
is  observable,  viz :  that  when  the  Scots  bishops  were  to  be  con- 
secrated by  the  bishops  of  London,  Ely  and  Bath,  here,  at 
London  house,  ann.  1609  ;  —  hesaith,  a  question  was  moved  by 
Dr.  Andrews,  bishop  of  Ely,  touching  the  consecration  of  the 
Scottish  bishops,  who,  as  he  said,  must  be  fiist  oidained  pres- 
byters, as  having  received  no  ordination  from  a  bishop.  The 
archbishop  of  Canterbury,  Dr.  Bancroft,  who  was  by,  main- 
tained, that  thereof  there  was  no  necessity,  seeing  where 
bishops  could  not  be  had,  the  ordination  given  by  presbyters 
must  be  esteemed  lawful,  otherwise  that  it  might  be  doubted  if 
there  were  any  lawful  vocation  in  most  of  the  reformeil  churches. 
This,  applauded  to  by  the  other  bishops,  Ely  acquiesced,  and 
at  the  day,  and  in  the  place  appointed,  tlie  three  Scottish  bish- 
ops were  consecrated  by  the  aforesaid  three  English  bishops." 
Baxter,  in  his  Five  Disputations  of  Church  Government,  says, 
that  "  the  English  prelates  maintained  that  protestant  churches 

1)  See   quoted   in   Powell,  p.  77.       testimony  of  Bishop  Cosins,  and  Arch- 

2)  See   Powell  on   Ap    Succ.  p.      bishop  Grindal. 

14,  where  may  be  seen  the   similar  3)  Loud.  1G57,  pp.  134,  135. 

49 


336      THE    PRACTICE    OF   THE    EARLY    ENGLISH   CHURCH.       [lECT.  XVI. 

that  had  no  bishops,  were  true  churches,  and  their  ministers 
true  ministers,  and  so  of  their  administrations.  This  was  so 
common  with  them,  that  I  do  not  think  a  dissenting  vote  can  be 
found,  from  the  first  reformation,  till  about  the  preparation  for 
the  Spanish  match,  or  a  little  before."  He  then  gives  a  long 
list  of  authors  in  proof.' 

A  catena  jpatrum  of  the  English  fathers  and  divines,  who 
have  opposed  the  exclusive  form  of  this  doctrine,  —  wiiich  we 
denominate  prelacy,  —  though  they  believed  in  episcopacy,  more 
or  less  firmly,  as  a  fact,  but  not  as  of  fundamental  importance, 
or  of  exclusive  divine  right;  might  easily  be  made  out,  and  not 


1)  Lond.  1G59,  ch.  v.  page  178. 
This  subject  is  thus  presented  by  the 
Rev.  J.  Cumining,  of  the  Scottish 
Church,  Covent  Garden,  in  his  Apol- 
ogy for  the  Church  of  Scotland, 
(Lond.  1{537,  pp.  14,  15.) 

"  In  earlier  times,  the  two  churches 
recognized  each  other  by  ostensible 
acts.  Such  was  the  respect  for  Scot- 
tish orders  among  the  bishops  and  re- 
formers of  the  English  Church  at  the 
reformation,  and  for  a  century  after- 
wards, that  nothing  was  more  com- 
mon than  for  a  minister  of  the  Scot- 
tish, or  other  reformed  churches,  to 
receive  a  license  from  the  bishop  of 
the  diocese  to  exercise  all  the  duties 
of  a  presbyter,  under  the  superinten- 
dence of  the  ordinary.  Strype  re- 
marks, in  his  Annals,  '  that  the  ordi- 
nation of  foreign  reformed  churches 
was  made  valid,  and  those  who  had 
no  other  orders  were  made  of  like  ca- 
pacity with  others  to  enjoy  any  place 
of  ministry  in  England.  Whitting- 
ham,  dean  of  Durham,  was  objected  to 
by  Sandys,  archbishop  of  York,  wliose 
orders  were  from  the  church  of  Rome, 
but  a  commission,  consisting  of  sev- 
eral dignitaries,  decided  that  his  or- 
ders were  good,  and  stated  by  the 
mouth  of  their  president,  '  They 
could  not  in  conscience  agree  to  de- 
prive him,  or  allow  of  the  popish  mass- 
ing priests  in  our  ministry,  and  to  dis- 
allow of  ministf'rs  made  in  a  reformed 
church.'  "  Bancroft,  archbp.  of  Can- 
terbury, consecrated  presbyters,  or- 
dained according  to  the  forms  of  pres- 
bytery, to  the  offices  of  bishops,  when 
James  I.  introduced  an  order  of  dio- 
cesan bishops  into  Scotland,  and  Bur- 
net st.ites,  thnt  presbyterial  orders 
were  almost  universally  recognized. 


To  this  day,  there  is  nothing  in  the 
rubric  or  articles  of  the  Church  of 
England,  to  prevent  a  bishop  from 
giving  his  license  to  a  presbyterial 
clergyman  to  preach  in  the  pulpits  of 
his  diocese." 

"  A  striking  illustration  of  the  views 
entertained  of  presbyterial  orders  in 
the  reign  of  James  I.  is  found  in  the 
following  fact :  A  Dr.  DeLaune  was 
presented  to  a  living  in  the  diocese  of 
Norwich.  The  bishop  (Overal)  natu- 
rally asked  him  where  he  obtained 
his  orders  ;  he  replied,  from  tiie  pres- 
bytery of  Leyden.  The  bishop  re- 
fused to  re-ordain,  in  these  words : 
'  Re-ordination  we  must  not  admit, 
no  more  tiian  re-baptization  ;  but  in 
case  you  find  it  doubtful  whether  you 
be  a  priest  capable  to  receive  a  bene- 
fice among  us  or  no,  I  will  do  the 
same  office  for  yoa,  if  you  desire  it, 
that  I  should  do  for  one  that  doubts 
of  his  baptism,  according  to  the  rule 
in  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  '  If 
thou  hejst  not  already,'  &c.  ;  yet,  for 
my  own  part,  if  you  will  venture  the 
orders  that  you  have,  1  will  give  you 
institution.'"  Birch's  Life  of  Tillot- 
son,  p.  184. 

That  this  doctrine  of  high-church 
prelacy  received  its  first  currency  in 
modern  times,  from  the  sermon  of 
Dr.  Bancroft,  in  1589,  is  evident  from 
the  fact,  that  the  only  contrary  evi- 
dence offered  by  Mr.  Soames,  is  the 
assumed  position  of  Archbishop  Whit- 
gift,  (Elizab.  Rel.  Hist.  p.  381.)  But 
as  we  have  shown  already,  and  will 
again,  Whitgift  stands  upon  the  very 
opposite  doctrine.  See  Neal,  vol.  i. 
p.  434,  and  Price's  Hist.  Nonconf. 
vol.  i.  p.  377. 


LECT.  XVI.]        THE    TESTIMONY    OF   THE    REV.    J.    E.    RIDDLE.  387 

like  that  delusive  catalogue  framed  by  the  Oxford  writers,  and 
which  is  altogether  beside  the  purpose.' 

It  may  not,  however,  be  out  of  place  to  add  here  a  few  more 
of  the  many  testimonies,  against  this  uncharitable  doctrine,  from 
some  of  the  most  eminent  divines  of  the  Englisii  church,  with 
which  our  reading  has  supplied  us.^  The  Rev.  J.  E.  Riddle,  the 
author  of  several  approved  works,  in  his  recent  and  valuable 
Compend  of  Ecclesiastical  Chronology,  thus  speaks  of  the 
English  church.''  "  Well  may  we  recognize  our  happiness  in 
being  members  of  a  christian  community,  which  teaches  from 
the  Bible,  and  not  from  tradition,  —  which  proclaims  apostolical 
truth,  instead  of  boasting  of  apostolical  succession,  —  which 
builds  upon  the  sure  word  of  God,  instead  of  appealing  to  the 
forgeries  and  impostures  of  human  fraud,  or  to  the  speculations  of 
human  imbecility  and  error,  —  and  which  is  bound,  by  its  own 
fundamental  principles,  to  maintain  the  language  of  courtesy 
and  respect,  aiid  to  hold  out  the  right  hand  of  christian  fellow- 
ship, towards  all  other  churches  in  which  the  pure  word  of  God 
is  preached,  and  the  sacraments  are  duly  administered." 

So,  also,  in  his  large  work  on  "Christian  Antiquities,"^  in  his 
"  Plea  for  Episcopacy,  Charity  and  Peace, "^  this  author  remarks, 
"  We  may  reasonably  believe  that  episcopacy  is  a  divine  institu- 
tion ;  but  we  have  no  right  to  contend  that  it  is  the  only  system 
to  which  that  honor  is  attached."^   Again,  he  says, — 

"  Among  the  questions  which  may  well  be  left  open, — being 
such  as  will  always  receive  different  answers  from  different 
inquirers, —  is  this,  —  Did  they  (the  apostles)  in  any  way  sanc- 
tion the  doctrines  commonly  connected  with  the  theory  of  apos- 
tolic succession  ?'"  He  goes  on  to  give  many  reasons  w'hy  they 
probably  did  not  f  and  then  adds — "  Whatever  may  become  of 
apostolic  succession  as  a  theory  or  institute,  it  is  impossible  at 
ALL  events,  to  prove  the  fact  of  such  succession,  or  to 
TRACE  IT  DOWN  THE   STREAM  of  TIME.     In  ihis  case  the  fact 

1)  Of  the  forty-three  extracts  395,  397,  419,  433.  See  facts  in  Prot. 
given  in  the  Tracts  for  the  Times,  No.  Dissent.  Catech.  pp.  27,29;  Bishop 
74,  as  testimonies  to  the  doctrine  of  Hall's  Wks.  vol.  viii.  pp.  50,51,53- 
the  apostolical  succession,  tliere  are  57 ;  Bishop  Davenant,  as  there  refer- 
not  more  than  a  dozen  who  do  red  to,  and  in  Coleman,  Christ.  An- 
really  testify  to  any  thing  like  the  tiq;  Jewell  in  Powell,  p.  79;  Brit.  Ref. 
doctrine  of  the  Tracts  on  that  sub-  vol.  vii.  pp.  217- 226,  and  pp  26-33. 
ject.  3)    Eccles.  Chron.   Lond.    1:40, 

2)  See   many  of  them  given  in  pref.  p.  9. 

fu'l  in  Dr.   Miller  on  the  Ministry,  p.  4)  Lond.  1S39,  pp.  82P. 

139,  &c.  Powell  on  Ap.  Succ.  §  vii. ;  5)  lb  d,  p.  55,  Pref. 

Presb.  Def.  pp.  38-40  ;  Neal's  Pari-  6)  Ibid,  p.  65. 

tan  .  v.  1.  iii.  pp.  284,  237,  352,  366,  7)  Ibid,  p.  70. 

372,  and  vol.  i.  pp.  217,  230,  261, 271 ,  8)  Ibid,  pp,  70,  71 ,  72 


388  TESTIMONY    OF    LONDON    CIIKTSTIAN    OBSERVER.       [lECT.  XVI. 

seems  to  involve  the  doctrine;  and   if  the  fact  be  hopelessly 
obscure,  the  doctrine  is  irrecoverably  lost." 

We  will  now  present  an  extract  from  the  Essays  on  the  Church, 
by  a  Layman,  which  have  attracted  great  notice,  and  are  quoted 
wiih  approbation,  in  the  London  Christian  Observer.'  "  If  our 
readers  have  as  carefully  perused  and  weighed  these  passages 
as  their  importance  deserves,  they  will  not  be  slow  in  coming  to 
the  author's  conclusion,  that,  the  '  via  media  ^  then,  of  the 
Church  of  England,  is  not  the  via  media  of  the  Oxford  tracts. 
The  first  is  a  wise  and  just  moderation,  holding  firm  to  essen- 
tials ;  offering  no  compromise  to  the  enemies  of  Christ ;  decided 
to  have  'no  peace  with  Rome;'  and  yet,  at  the  same  time  that 
it  maintains  its  own  views  of  church  government,  distinctly  and 
meekly  offering  the  right  hand  of  fellowship  to  all  other  churches 
'holding  the  head,'  without  requiring  them  to  take  the  same 
identical  view  of  those  questions  of  church  government,  on 
which  the  scriptures  allow  a  degree  of  obscurity  to  rest." 

"They  talk  of'  the  old  standard  divinity  of  the  church  ;'  but 
when  we  come  to  name  the  authors,  they  can  think  of  none  but 
Laud,  and  Heylin,  and  Leslie,  and  Bull !  Now  we  deny  that 
these  have  the  least  title  to  be  considered  our  '  old  standard 
divines.'  We  want  the  works  of  those  who  founded  and  built 
up  our  church;  but  they  offer  us  those  only  who  tried  their 
utmost,  and  partly  succeeded  in  pulling  it  down!" 

The  London  Christian  Observer  thus  speaks  -.^ — 

"Now  our  readers  know  the  extreme  displeasure  of  the  Ox- 
ford iract  divines  at  there  being  nothing  about  the  'apostolical 
succession'  in  our  articles;  and  that  the  validiiy  of  the  orders 
of  foreign  protestants  has  ever  been  acknowledged  by  our 
church,  and  in  the  writings  of  her  divines;  a  few  Laudites  only 
excepted.  But  here  we  have  presented  to  us  a  sermon  of 
Cranmer's,  with  this  ambiguous  expression,  'apostolical  succes- 
sion,' on  its  very  front.  Again,  the  Oxford  tract  divines  mourn 
bitterly  that  there  is  nothing  about  'the  altar,'  or  'the  blessed 
sacrament  of  the  altar'  —  that  incorrigibly  popish  phrase  —  in  our 
prayer  book;  that  the  alleged  'altar'  is  studiously  called  by  our 
reformers,  a  'table,'  and  the  alleged  'sacrifice,'  a  'supper.' 
'  For  it  cannot  be  denied,  that  the  Church  of  England  did 
acknowledge  the  validity  of  presbyterian  ordination;  nay,  that 
presbyters  were  for  many  years  even  allowed  to  minister  within 
its  pale,  and  to  enjoy  its  preferments;  nor  did  any  one  of  our 
primates,  from  Cranmer  to  Hovvley,  Laud  only  excepted,  ever 


1)  Oct.  1838,  p.  650.  2)  Nov.  1838,  pp.  221,  820,  822, 


826. 


LECT.  XVI.]    DIFFERENT   PARTIES   IN   THE    CHURCH    OF   ENGLAND.     389 

dispute  the  claim  of  the  protestant  churches  to  be  accounted 
portions  of  Christ's  visible  kingdom.'  '  If  any  of  our  readers 
will  refer  to  Bishop  Burnet's  '  Vindication  of  the  ordinations  of 
the  Ciiurch  of  England,'  in  which  it  is  demonstrated  that  all  the 
essentials  of  ordination,  according  to  the  practice  of  the  primi- 
tive and  Greek  churches,  are  still  retained  in  our  church  ;  in 
answer  to  a  paper  written  by  one  of  the  church  of  Rome  to 
prove  the  nullity  of  our  orders,  and  given  to  a  person  of  qual- 
ity ;  they  will  see  the  exceeding  injury  which  the  Oxford-tract 
extravagant  doctrine  upon  apostolical  succession  (which  is  not 
the  true  Anglican  or  scriptural  doctrine,  but  the  Romish)  is  likely 
to  do  to  our  apostolical  church,  and  to  the  reformation  in  gen- 
eral ;  indeed,  we  may  say  to  our  common  Christianity.'  We 
sincerely  believe  that  upon  the  non-spiritual  principles  assumed 
by  the  objector,  the  orders  of  the  Church  of  England  would  be 
invalid.'" 

Tlie  same  work  for  February,  of  this  year,^  says :  "  The  prom- 
inent opinions  which  divide  our  church  may  be  classed  under 
three  heads." 

"  There  was  first,  the  school  of  the  reformers.  This  comprised 
the  Cranmers,  Ridleys,  Latimers,  Hoopers,  Jewells,  and  Hook- 
ers, of  the  days  of  Edward  VI.  and  Queen  Elizabeth.  The 
divines  of  this  school  regarded  the  word  of  God  as  the  sole 
authoritative  rule  of  faith  and  practice  ;  they  considered  Rome 
to  be  antichrist ;  and  though  persuaded  that  episcopacy  is  of 
divine  institution,  and  zealously  attached  to  it,  both  upon  prin- 
ciple and  by  experience,  they  yet  cordially  embraced  the 
lutheran  and  reformed  churches  as  sisterly  communions.  Their 
tenets  were  clearly  set  forth  in  the  Thirty-nine  Articles,  and  more 
largely  unfolded  in  the  Homilies;  and  that  which  gave  special 
life  and  efficacy  to  them,  was  that  fundamental  doctrine  of 
grace  which  Rome  repudiated,  justification  by  faith,  with  which, 
after  the  example  of  St.  Paul  and  St.  James,  they  connected 
all  other  scriptural  doctrines,  with  their  blessed  fruits  in  the 
heart  and  life." 

"  Towards  the  close  of  the  reign  of  Elizabeth,  and  in  the 
beginning  of  that  of  James  I.,  there  sprang  up  a  new  school, 
widely  differing  from  that  of  the  reformers,  and  the  tenets  of 
which  at  length  acquired  the  coherence  of  a  system  ;  and  under 
the  influence  of  Archbishop  Laud,  in  the  reign  of  Charles  II., 
became  widely  prevalent.  At  the  restoration  they  were  resus- 
citated by  the  surviving  divines  of  Laud's  school ;  and  they 
were,  for  the  most  part,  embraced  by  the  non-jurors." 

1)  1841,  p.  76. 


390    TESTIMONY    OF    HON.    B.    NOEL   AND    STILLINGFLEET.    [LECT.  XVI. 

The  Hon.  and  Rev.  Baptist  Noel,  in  his  Tract  on  the  Unity 
of  the  Church,  makes  this  supposition:'  "Another  christian, 
bearing  in  his  hfe  and  character  all  the  marks  of  a  child  of  God, 
wishes  to  determine  whether  he  should  join  the  episcopalian 
section  of  the  church  of  Christ,  or  the  presbyterian.  He,  too, 
examined  scripture,  weighed  the  evidence  on  both  sides,  con- 
versed with  upright  and  intelligent  men  in  both  communions, 
and  prayed  to  be  directed  right.  After  much  deliberation,  he 
became  convinced  that  diocesan  episcopacy  has  no  sanction 
in  the  word  of  God,  and  that  the  orders  and  discipline  of  the 
presbyterian  body  are  most  conformed  to  the  usages  of  the 
church  in  the  New  Testament ;  that  presbyterian  orders  are  of 
divine  appointment,  and  that  it  was  the  will  of  Christ  that  he 
should  be  so  ordained.  With  that  opinion  he  became  a  pres- 
byterian minister.  Am  I  now  to  separate  from  his  society  ? 
How  has  he  sinned  ?  He  was  obliged  to  follow  what  seemed  to 
him  the  will  of  Christ,  His  conclusions  were  supported  by  the 
decisions  of  several  of  the  protestant  churches.  The  Lutheran, 
Swiss,  French,  Dutch,  and  Scotch  churches,  the  church  of  the 
Vaudois,  and  a  large  and  pious  section  of  the  American  church 
were  all  on  his  side.  While,  in  favor  of  episcopacy,  besides 
the  church  of  Rome,  the  mother  of  harlots  and  abominations  of 
the  earth,  drunken  with  the  blood  of  the  saints  and  with  the 
blood  of  the  martyrs  of  Jesus ;  and  the  eastern  churches,  which 
are  nearly  as  corrupt,  he  found  only  the  Church  of  England, 
and  three  or  four  small  sections  of  the  church  of  Christ  else- 
where, who  had  retained  diocesan  episcopacy.  Under  these  cir- 
cumstances am  I  to  separate  from  him?  Not  to  have  examined 
the  scripture  doctrine  would  have  been  sin.  Not  to  have  fol- 
lowed the  conviction  of  duty,  to  which  the  examinations  would 
have  led  him,  would  have  been  sin.  In  fidelity  to  Christ,  he 
was  obliged  to  act  as  he  did  ;  and  if  I  separate  from  him,  I  do 
it  only  because  he  did  his  duty." 

Sillllngfleet^  (we  mean  of  course  the  dean — not  the  bishop) 
largely  proves,  that  it  was  the  judgment  of  the  most  eminent 
divines  of  the  reformation  that  the  form  of  church  government 
depends  on  the  wisdom  of  the  magistrate,  and  that  the  form 
of  the  church  is  mutable.  He  attributes  this  opinion  to 
Cranmer  and  other  divines  in  the  time  of  Edward  VI.,  to  Whit- 
gift,  Bishop  Bridges,  Dr.  Loe,  Mr.  Hooker,  King  James,  Dr. 
Sutcliffe,  Mr.  Hales,  and  Mr.  Chiillngworth.^  He,  Dr.  Stil- 
lingfleet,  says,  "  I  doubt  not  to  make  it  evident,  that  the  main 


12. 


1)  Lond.  1838,  25th  ed.  pp.  11,  2)  Iren.  pt.  ii.ch.  viii. 

3)  Iren.  pt.  iii  ch.  vii. 


LECT.  XVI.]    TESTIMONY    OF    DR.    WILLET,    AND    BISHOP    FOWLER.     391 

ground  for  settling  episcopal  government  in  this  nation,  was  not 
accounted  any  pretence  of  divine  right,  but  the  convenience  of 
that  form  of  church  government,  to  the  state  and  condition  of 
this  church,  at  the  time  of  the  reformation."* 

Dr.  WiJiet,  in  arguing  with  Bellarmine,  expressly  denies  the 
necessity  for  this  asserted  succession,  which  the  cardinal  makes 
necessary. 2 

"  First,  a  local,  personal,  and  lineal  succession,  is  not  now 
needful,  as  before,  under  the  law  ;  the  true  worship  is  not  now 
tied  to  person  or  place,  as  our  Saviour  showeth,  John  iv.  21, 
'  God  will  be  worshipped,  neither  in  this  mountain  nor  in  Jeru- 
salem ; '  and  by  the  same  reason,  neither  at  Rome,  &,c.  Sec- 
ondly, yet  a  succession  of  doctrine  and  faithful  pastors  we 
grant,  and  the  church  was  never  without ;  such  as  the  prophet 
speaketh  of,  Esai.  lix.  21.  First,  if  you  will  credit  St.  Hier- 
ome,  he  saith,  olim  idem  erat  presbyter  et  episcopus :  In  the 
beginning  a  bishop  and  a  priest  were  all  one,  and  before  that 
schisms  entered  into  the  church,  communi  preshyterum  consilio 
ecclesicE  guhernahantur,  the  churches  were  governed  in  com- 
mon by  the  whole  presbytery,  &c.,  which  sentence  of  his  is 
allowed  in  your  own  canons:  (Decret.  parti,  dist.  95,  cap.  5.)  If 
it  be  thus,  that  this  distinction  of  bishops  and  priests  was  not 
brought  in  in  the  apostle's  time,  but  afterward,  then  can  no 
such  ordination  be  showed  from  the  apostle's  time." 

"Thirdly,  we  say,  that  a  succession  of  persons  in  the  same 
place,  without  a  succession  of  doctrine  which  they  cannot  show, 
is  nothing  worth.  A  succession  of  the  apostolic  faith  and  doc- 
trine proveth  a  continuance  of  pastors  and  teachers,  and  not 
contrariwise."^ 

Let  us  now  hear  the  sentiments  of  a  few  Anglican  prelates. 
Bishop  Fowler  thus  speaks:'*  "And  we  can  reply,  that  besides 
England,  Scotland,  and  Ireland,  in  which  protestancy  is  the  na- 
tional religion  ;  and  in  the  two  former  of  which,  the  number  of 
papists  is  very  inconsiderable  ;  and  besides  Denmark,  Norway, 
Sweden,  and  the  United  Provinces,  in  all  which  it  is  also  the 
national  religion  :  and  besides  Germany,  Switzerland,  Hungary, 
Transylvania,  in  which  are  abundance  of  proiestant  churches, 

1)  Burnet,  in  his  History  of  his  aged  with  so  much  learning  and  skill, 

own  Times,    anno.    16G1,    says,    "to  tliat  none  of  either  side  ever  under- 

avoid      the    imputation    that      boolc  took  to  answer  it."  So  speaks  Bishop 

brought  on  him,  he  went  into  the  hu-  White    in    his    Case    of  the    Efiisc. 

mors  of  a  high  sort  of  people  beyond  Churches,  17c2,  p.  25  of  this  work, 
what  became  him,  perhaps  beyond  his  2)   Syn.   Pap.  p.  165,  and  also  on 

own  sense  of  things.    Tlie  book,  how-  pp.  81,b2. 
ever,  was.  it  seems, easier  RETRACTED  3)  See  Note  A. 

than  REFtTED,  for  though  offensive  4)  Notes  of  the  Ch.  p.  123. 

to  many  of  both  parlies,  it  was  man- 


892   BISHOPS    HALL,  PHILPOT,    BRADFORD,  AND    ANDREWS.    [lECT.  XVI. 

(as  there  were  lately  in  the  kingdom  of  France,  too,  and  it  will 
never  be  forgot  by  what  methods  they  have  been  extirpated ;) 
besides  all  those  countries,  1  say,  the  protestants  have  also  their 
churches  in  the  new  world,  no  less  without  the  mixture  of  here- 
tics ;  and  these  consist  of  other  kind  of  believers  than  those  the 
Romanists  boast  of  in  that  quarter." 

Bishop  Hall  thus  speaks'  of  the  reformed  churches  : 

"  These  sisters  have  learned  to  differ,  and  yet  to  love  and 
reverence  each  other ;  and  in  these  caseSj  to  enjoy  their  own 
forms  without  prescription  of  necessity  or  censure." 

The  martyr  bishop,  Philpot,'^  "  thus  answereth  to  the  argument 
of  succession  :  that  it  is  no  infallible  note  of  the  church  ;  for 
there  may  be  a  succession  of  bishops  where  there  is  no  church,  as 
at  Antioch,  and  Jerusalem:  but  if  you  put  to  succession  of  bish- 
ops, succession  of  doctrine  withal!,  as  it  was  in  Augustine's  time, 
when  he  used  this  argument  against  the  Donatists,  it  is  a  good 
proofs." 

"  The  ministrie  of  God's  word,  and  ministers  be  an  essentiall 
point  ;  but  to  translate  this,  saith  he,  to  the  outward  glorious 
succession  of  bishops,  is  a  plain  subtiltie." 

Bradford  thus  wrote  in  his  reply  to  Lady  Vane  :^  "  But  be 
it  so,  that  Peter  hath  as  much  given  to  him  as  they  do  affirm, 
who  yet  will  grant  that  Peter  had  a  patrimony  for  his  heirs  ?  He 
hath  left  (say  the  papists)  to  his  successors  the  self-same  right 
which  he  received.  O  Lord  God  !  then  must  his  successor  be 
a  Satan,  for  he  received  that  title  of  Christ  himself.  I  would 
glad  have  the  papists  show  me  one  place  of  succession  mentioned 
in  the  scriptures.  I  am  sure  that  when  Paul  purposely  painteth 
out  the  whole  ministration  of  the  church,  he  neither  rnaketh  one 
head,  nor  any  inheritable  primacy,  and  yet  he  is  altogether  in 
commendation  of  unity.  After  he  hath  made  mention  of  one  God 
the  Father,  of  one  Christ,  of  one  Spirit,  of  one  body  of  the 
church,  of  one  faith,  and  of  one  baptism  ;  then  he  describeth  the 
mean  and  manner  how  unity  is  to  be  kept,  namely,  because  unto 
EVERY  PASTOR  is  grace  givcn  after  the  measure  wherewith  Christ 
hath  endued  them.  Where,  I  pray  you,  is  now  any  title  to  ful- 
ness of  power  ? " 

Bishop  Andrews  says,*  "Though  episcopal  government  be  of 
divine  institution,  yet  it  is  not  so  absolutely  necessary  as  that  there 
can  be  no  church,  nor  sacraments,  nor  salvation,  without  it.  He 
is  blind,  that  sees  not  many  churches  flourishing  without  it ; 

1)  Wks.  vol.  ix.  p.  432.  page  138,  and  British  Ref.  page  102. 

2)  Willet  Syn.  Pap.  p.  83.  4)  See  in  Bristed's  Thoughts,  p. 

3)  Fath.  of  the  Engl.  Ch.  vol.  vi.      440. 


LECT.  XVI.]   TESTIMONY  OF  HOADLY,  SHERLOCK,  AND  BURNET.    393 

and  he  must  have  a  heart  as  hard  as  iron,  that  will  deny  them 
salvalion." 

Bishop  Hoadly  has  fully  vindicated  his  rejection  of  this  doc- 
trine of  uninterrupted  succession,  as  "a  trifle  and  a  nicety  "  — 
the  "dreams  and  inventions  of  men  who  have  made  that  neces- 
sary which  they  cannot  prove  to  be  at  all,  and  which  our  blessed 
Lord  in  his  account  of  the  matters  upon  which  salvation  is  to  de- 
pend, never  once  mentions"  —  in  his  answer  to  the  representa- 
tions of  the  committee  of  the  Lower  House,  &z,c.' 

"  But,"  says  Bishop  Sherlock,  in  his  Examination  into  Bel- 
larmine's  Notes  of  the  Church,  "  as  for  what  he  says  that  succes- 
sion of  doctrine  without  succession  of  office,  is  a  poor  plea ;  I 
must  needs  tell  him  that  I  think  it  is  a  much  better  plea  than  suc- 
cession of  office  without  succession  of  doctrine.  For  I  am  sure 
that  it  is  not  a  safe  communion  where  there  is  not  a  succession  of 
apostolical  doctrine ;  but  whether  the  want  of  a  succession  of 
bishops  will  in  all  cases  unchurch,  will  admit  of  a  greater  dispute. 
I  am  sure  a  true  faith  in  Christ,  with  a  true  gospel  conversation, 
will  save  men  ;  and  some  learned  Romanists^  defend  that  old  de- 
finition of  the  church,  that  it  is  coitus  fidelium,  the  company  of  the 
faithful,  and  will  not  admit  bishops  or  pastors  into  the  definition 
of  a  church."^ 

Thus  also  he  says  :"  "  Now  I  must  confess,  these  notes,  as  he 
well  observes,  are  common  to  all  christian  churclies,  and  were  in- 
tended to  be  so  ;  and  if  this  does  not  answer  his  design,  we  can- 
not help  it.  The  protestant  churches  do  not  desire  to  confine 
the  notes  of  the  church  to  their  own  private  communions,  but 
are  very  glad  if  all  the  churches  in  the  world  be  as  true  churches 
as  themselves." 

Bishop  Burnet,  in  a  passage  which  the  London  Christian  Ob- 
server says  should  be  written  in  letters  of  gold,  says,  "Thus  far* 
I  have  complied  with  your  desires  of  answering  the  paper  you 
sent  me,  in  as  short  and  clear  terms  as  I  could.  But  I  must 
add  that  this  ransacking  of  records  about  a  succession  of  orders, 
though  ir  adds  much  to  the  lustre  and  beauty  of  the  church,  yet 
is  not  a  thing  incumbent  on  every  body  to  look  much  into,  nor 
indeed,  possible  for  any  to  be  satisfied  about ;  for  a  great 
many  ages  all  those  instruments  are  lost ;  so  that  how  ordina- 
tions were  made  in  the  primitive  church,  we  cannot  certainly 
know ;  it  is  a  piece  of  history,  and  very  hard   to  be  perfectly 

1)  See   Hoadly 's  Wks.  fol.    vol.  3)  Notes  of  tlie  Church  Exam- 
ii.  pp.  485,  486.     See  Bishop  White's  ined  and  Refuted,  pp.  54, 55. 
Opinion  of  Hoadly,  above.  4)  Ibid,  p.  4. 

2)  Johan  Laiin.  epist.    vol.   viii.  5)  Lond.  Chr.  Obs.  1838,  p.  827. 
epist.  13,  Nicol  Gatinaeo. 

50 


394  THE    TESTIMONY    OF   BISHOP    BURNET.  [lECT.    XVI. 

known.  Therefore  it  cannot  be  a  fit  study  for  any,  much  less 
for  one  that  has  not  much  leisure.  The  condition  of  christians 
were  very  hard,  if  private  persons  must  certainly  know  how  all 
ministers  have  been  ordained  since  the  apostles'  days ;  for  if  we 
will  raise  scruples  in  this  matter,  it  is  impossible  to  satisfy  them 
unless  tlie  authentic  registers  of  all  the  ages  of  the  church  could 
be  showed,  which  is  impossible ;  for  though  we  were  satisfied 
that  all  the  priests  of  this  age  were  duly  ordained,  yet  if  we  be 
not  as  sure  that  all  who  ordained  them  had  orders  rightly  given 
them,  and  so  upward  till  the  days  of  the  apostles,  the  doubt  will 
still  remain." 

"  Therefore,  the  pursuing  of  nice  scruples  about  this,  cannot 
be  a  thing  indispensably  necessary  ;  otherwise  all  people  must 
be  perplexed  with  endless  disquiet  and  doubtings.  But  the  true 
touchstone  of  a  church  must  be  the  purity  of  her  doctrine,  and 
the  conformity  of  her  faith  with  that  which  Christ  and  his  apos- 
tles taught.  In  this  the  scriptures  are  clear  and  plain  to  every 
one  that  ivill  read  and  consider  them  sincerely  and  ivithout  pre- 
judice; which  that  you  may  do,  and  by  these  may  be  led  and 
guided  into  all  truth,  shall  be  my  constant  prayer  to  God  for 
you." 

The  following  testimony,  given  by  Bishop  Burnet,  when  sev- 
enty years  old,  and  addressing  the  world,  through  the  press,  on 
an  occasion,  as  he  felt,  of  the  greatest  solemnity,  is  peculiarly 
impressive.  It  is  contained  in  his  Description  of  a  Low-Church- 
man.' "  The  raising  the  authority  and  power  of  sacred  func- 
tions, beyond  what  is  founded  on  clear  warrants  in  scripture, 
is,  they  think,  the  readiest  way  to  give  the  world  such  a  jeal- 
ousy of  them,  and  such  an  aversion  to  them,  as  may  make  them 
lose  the  authority  that  they  ought  to  have,  while  they  pretend 
to  that  they  have  not. 

"  They  dare  not  unchurch  all  the  bodies  of  the  protestants  be- 
yond the  seas  ;  nor  deny  to  our  dissenters,  at  home,  the  federal 
rights  common  to  all  christians,  or  leave  them  to  uncovenanted 
mercy.  They  do  not  annul  their  baptisms,  or  think  they  ought 
to  be  baptized  again,  in  a  more  regular  manner,  before  they  can 
be  accounted  christians.  They  know  of  no  power  in  a  priest 
to  pardon  sin,  other  than  the  declaring  the  gospel  pardon, 
upon  the  conditions  upon  luhich  it  is  ojfered.  They  knoiv  of 
no  sacrifice  in  the  eucharist,  other  than  the  commemorating 
that  on  the  cross,  with  the  oblation  of  the  jjrayers,  praises  and 
almsgiving,  prescribed  in  the  office.  They  are  far  from  con- 
demning private  judgment  in  matters  of  religion;  this  strikes 

1)  Past.  Care,  pref.  p.  44,  Lond.  182] ,  14th  ed. ;  Ld.  Chr.  Obs.  Sep.  1840,  p.  554. 


LECT.  XVI.]       TESTIMONY  OF  BISHOPS  WARBURTON  AND  KNOX.  395 

at  the  root  of  the  whole  reformation,  ichich  could  never  have 
been  compassed,  if  private  men  have  not  a  right  of  judging  for 
themselves ;  on  the  contrary,  they  think  every  man  is  bound  to 
judge  for  himself,  which,  indeed,  he  ought  to  do,  in  the  fear 
of  God,  and  with  all  humility,  and  caution.  They  look  on  all 
these  notions  as  steps  toioard  popery,  though  they  do  not  con- 
clude that  all  those  ivho  have  made  them,  designed  that,  by  so 
doing." 

Bishop  Warburton,  in  his  Sermon  on  Church  Communion, 
makes  the  following  remarks  : — "  My  purpose,  in  this  discourse, 
was  only  to  expose  the  vain  opinion  of  inherent  sanctity,  or  su- 
periority, or  exclusive  privilege,  in  one  church  above  another, 
merely  because  founded  by  a  Paul,  a  Peter,  an  Andrew,  or  a 
James,  or  merely  because  administered  by  an  hierarchy,  by  an 
equal  ministry,  or  a  moderate  episcopacy  ;  because  such  opin- 
ions have  produced,  and  do  still  produce,  that  wretched  spirit, 
which  here,  on  the  authority  of  God's  word,  I  have  endeavored 
to  discredit,  and  ventured  to  condemn,  confiding  in  the  oracles 
of  eternal  truth,  that  he  that  is  not  against  us  is  for  us,"  (the 
sermon  was  preached  upon  Mark  ix.  39,  or  Luke  xi.  49,  50,) 
*'  and  will  be  treated  by  our  heavenly  Father,  not  as  a  rebel, 
but  a  subject ;  and,  therefore,  should  be  now  considered  by  us, 
as  he  will  then  be  by  Him,  who  is  the  common  judge  of  us 
both." 

When  the  Rev.  Robert  Blair  desired  to  labor  in  Ulster,  the 
Viscount  of  Clanniboy,  "  his  patron  did,"  says  he,  "  on  my  re- 
quest, inform  Bishop  Knox,  how  opposite  I  was  to  episcopacy, 
and  their  liturgy,  and  had  the  influence  to  procure  my  admission 
on  easy  and  honorable  terms  ;  yet,  lest  his  lordship  had  not  been 
plain  enough,  I  declared  ray  opinion  fully  to  the  bishop,  at  our 
first  meeting,  and  found  him  yielding,  beyond  my  expectation. 
He  told  me  that  he  was  well  informed  of  my  piety,  and,  therefore, 
would  impose  no  conditions  upon  me  inconsistent  with  my  prin- 
ciples ;  only  that  he  behooved  to  ordain  me,  else  neither  of  us 
durst  be  answerable  to  the  law.  I  answered  him,  that  his  sole 
ordination  did  utterly  contradict  my  principles.  But  he  replied 
both  wittily  and  submissively,  '  Whatever  you  account  of  episco- 
pacy, yet  I  know  you  account  a  presbytery  to  have  divine  war- 
rant ;  will  you  not  receive  ordination  from  Mr.  Cunningham, 
and  the  adjacent  brethren,  and  let  me  come  in  among  them,  in 
no  other  relation  than  a  presbyter?'  This,  I  could  not  refuse; 
and  so  the  matter  was  performed."* 

The  famous  Livingston,  who  also  labored  in  Ireland  at  this 

1)  See  Life  of  Blair,  p.  52. 


396  TESTIMONY  OF  BISHOP  KNOX  AND  OF  VVHITGIFT.       [lECT.    XVI. 

time,  gives  a  similar  account  of  this  bishop.'  "  About  August, 
1630,  1  got  letters  from  the  Viscount  Clannlboy,  to  come  to 
Ireland,  in  reference  to  a  call  to  Killinchie,  whither  I  went,  and 
got  an  unanimous  call  from  the  parish  ;  and,  because  it  was 
needful  that  I  should  be  ordained  to  the  ministry,  and  the 
bishop  of  Down,  in  whose  diocese  Killinchie  was,  being  a  cor- 
rupt humorous  man,  and  would  require  some  engagement,  there- 
fore, my  Lord  Clanniboy  sent  some  with  me,  and  wrote  to  Mr. 
Andrew  Knox,  bishop  of  Rapho,  who,  when  I  came,  and  had 
delivered  the  letters  from  my  Lord  Clanniboy,  and  from  the 
Earl  of  Wigtoun,  and  some  others,  that  I  had  for  that  purpose 
brought  out  of  Scotland,  told  me  he  knew  my  errand  ;  that  I 
came  to  him  because  1  had  scruples  against  episcopacy  and 
ceremonies,  according  as  Mr.  Josiah  Welsh,  and  some  others, 
had  done  before  ;  and  that  he  thought  his  old  age  was  prolong- 
ed for  little  other  purpose,  but  to  do  such  office  :  that  if  I 
scrupled  to  call  him  My  Lord,  he  cared  not  much  for  it ;  all 
that  he  virould  desire  of  me,  because  they  got  there  but  few 
sermons,  that  I  would  preach  at  Ramallen  the  first  Sabbath, 
and  that  I  would  send  for  Mr.  Cunningham,  and  two  or  three 
other  neighboring  ministers  to  be  present,  who,  after  sermon, 
should  give  me  imposition  of  hands  ;  but,  although  they  per- 
formed the  work,  he  behooved  to  be  present ;  and  although  he 
durst  not  answer  it  to  the  state,  he  gave  me  the  book  of  ordi- 
nation, and  desired,  that  any  thing  I  scrupled  at,  I  should  draw  a 
line  over  It  on  the  margin,  and  that  Mr.  Cunningham  should 
not  read  it :  but  I  found  that  it  had  been  so  marked  by  some 
others  before,  that  I  needed  not  mark  any  thing.  So  the  Lord 
was  pleased  to  carry  that  business  far  beyond  any  thing  that  I 
had  thought,  or  almost  ever  desired." 

Let  us  now  hear  the  opinion  of  a  few  archbishops. 

In  his  Defence  of  the  Answer  to  the  Admonition, ^  Archbish- 
op Whitgift  says  :^  *'  Wherefore  the  controversie  is  not  whether 
many  of  the  things  mentioned  by  the  platformers,  were  fitly 
used  in  the  apostles'  times,  or  may  now  be  well  used  in  some 
places,  yea,  or  be  conveniently  used  in  sundry  reformed  church- 
es at  this  day.  For  none  of  these  branches  are  denyed,  neither 
do  we  take  upon  us  to  (as  we  are  slandered)  either  to  blame  or 
condemne  other  churches  for  such  orders  as  they  have  received 
most  fit  for  their  estate." 

1)  Life  of  Rev.  John  Livinofston,  3)  See  pref.  to  the  reader,  and  see 
Glasgow,  1754,  p.  13.                 ^  also  p.  174,  where  he  shows  that  the 

2)  Fol.  Lend.  1574.  My  copy  is  diversity  of  our  times  from  the  apos- 
that  of  Leigh  Richmond,  with  his  au-  lies  requires  a  diverse  kind  of  govern- 
tograph.  ment,  and  of  ordering  of  ministers. 


LECT.  XVI.]         ARCHBISHOPS    WHITGIFT    AND    TILLOTSON.  397 

"  But  to  let  this  pass  and  come  to  the  purpose  :  this  replie 
of  T.  C.  (which  is  of  some  accounted  so  notahle  a  piece  of 
work)  consisteih  of  two  false  principles  and  rotten  pillars  :  where- 
of the  one  is,  that  wee  must  of  necessitie  have  the  same  kind  of 
government  that  was  in  the  apostles'  tyme,  and  is  expressed  in 
the  scriptures,  and  no  other :  the  other  is,  that  we  maj^  not,  in 
any  wise,  or  in  any  consideration,  reteyne  in  the  church  any 
thing  that  hath  bin  abused  under  the  pope  :  if  these  two  first 
be  weake,  yea  rotten,  (as  I  have  proved  them  to  be  in  this  my 
Defence,)  then  must  the  building  of  necessitie  fall." 

"  The  offices  in  the  church  whereby  this  government  is 
wrought,  be  not  namely  and  particularlie  expressed  in  the  scrip- 
tures, but  in  some  points  leit  to  the  discretion  and  libertie  of 
the  church,  to  be  disposed  according  to  the  state  of  the  tymes, 
places,  and  persons,  as  I  have  further  declared  in  my  Answer 
and  Defense  following." 

"Archbishop  Tillotson  once  made  a  remark  respecting  a  more 
than  semi-papist  book,  by  one  of  his  party,  w-hich  is  worth  the 
recollection  of  some  who  are  perplexed  by  the  Oxford  tracts, 
feeling  convinced  that  their  conclusions  are  '  palpably  false  ' 
and  '  absurd,'  and  yet  not  being  always  able  to  sustain  their 
sophistry.  '  Such  has  been  the  height,'  says  his  friend  and 
former  pupil,  Beardmore,  *of  our  Altitudinarian  divines,  as  that 
they  have  not  stuck  to  challenge  the  reformed  churches  be- 
yond the  seas,  as  being  no  church  for  want  of  episcopal  govern- 
ment ;  as  particularly  that  learned  person,  Mr.  Dodwell,  in  his 
book  about  schism,  and  his  other  book.  One  Priesthood,  one 
Altar  ;  about  which  I  remember  having  some  discourse  with 
our  late  archbishop,  about  ten  years  ago.  He  told  me  that  Mr. 
Dodwell  brought  his  book  to  himself  to  peruse,  before  he  put  it 
into  the  press,  and  desired  him  to  give  his  judgment  of  it ;  that  he 
freely  told  him  his  dislike  of  it ;  that  though  it  was  writ  with  such 
accuracy  and  close  dependence  of  one  proposition  upon  another, 
as  that  it  seemed  to  be  little  else  but  demonstration  :  so  that, 
saith  he,  '  I  can  hardly  tell  where  it  is  you  break  the  chain ;  yet 
I  am  sure  it  is  broken  somewhere  ;  for  such  and  such  particu- 
lars are  so  palpably  false,  that  I  wonder  you  do  not  feel  the  ab- 
surdity, they  are  so  gross,  and  grate  so  much  upon  the  inward 
sense.'  And  I  remember  also  he  said,  Mr.  Dodwell  had  run 
into  one  extreme,  as  much  as  Mr.  Baxter  had  done  into  the 
other.'" 

Archbishop  Bramhall,  in  his  Vindication  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land,^ thus  speaks  :  "  But  because  I  esteem  them   churches   not 

1)  Lond.  Chr.  Obs.  1839,  p.  80.        2)  Disc.  iii.  See  Oxf.  Tr.  vol.  iii.  p.  138. 


398  TESTIMONY    OF   ARCHBISHOP    BRAMHALL.  [LECT.  XVI. 

completely  formed,  do  I,  therefore,  exclude  them  from  all  hopes 
of  salvation  ?  or  esteem  them  aliens  and  strangers  from  the  com- 
monwealth of  Israel  ?  or  account  them  formal  schismatics  ?  No 
such  thing. 

"  It  is  not  at  all  material,  whether  episcopacy  and  priesthood 
be  two  distinct  orders,  or  distinct  degrees  of  the  same  orders,  the 
one  subordinate  to  the  other ;  whether  episcopal  ordination  do 
introduce  a  new  character,  or  extend  the  old."  "  Those  that 
unchurch  either  all,  or  most  of  the  protestant  churches,  and 
maintain  the  Roman  church  and  not  theirs  to  be  true,  do  call  us 
to  a  moderate  jealousie  of  them."  "  His  assumption  is  wanting, 
which  should  be  this  ;  but  a  considerable  party  of  episcopal  di- 
vines in  England  do  unchurch  all  or  most  of  the  protestant 
churches,  and  maintain  the  Roman  church  to  be  a  true  church, 
and  these  to  be  no  true  churches.  1  can  assent  to  neither  of  his 
propositions,  nor  to  any  part  of  them,  as  true  sub  modo,  as  they 
are  alleged  by  him." 

"  Episcopal  divines  do  not  deny  those  churches  to  be  true 
churches,  wherein  salvation  may  be  had.  We  advise  them,  as  it 
is  our  duty,  to  be  circumspect  for  themselves,  and  not  to  put  it  to 
more  question,  whether  they  have  ordination  or  not,  or  desert 
the  general  practice  of  the  universal  church  for  nothing,  when 
they  may  clear  it  if  they  please.  Their  case  is  not  the  same  with 
those  who  labor  under  invincible  necessity.  What  mine  own 
sense  is  of  it,  I  have  declared  many  years  since  to  the  world  in 
print ;  and  in  the  same  way  received  thanks,  and  a  public  ac- 
knowledgment of  my  moderation,  from  a  French  divine.  And 
yet  more  particularly  in  my  reply  to  the  Bishop  of  Chalcedon,' 
episcopal  divines  will  readily  subscribe  to  the  determination  of 
the  learned  bishop  of  Winchester,  in  his  answer  to  the  second 
epistle  of  Molineus.  Nevertheless,  if  our  form  (of  episcopacy) 
be  of  divine  right,  it  doth  not  follow  from  thence,  that  there  is  no 
salvation  without  it,  or  that  a  church  cannot  consist  without  it. 
He  is  blind  who  does  not  see  churches  consisting  without  it ;  he 
is  hard-hearted  who  denieth  them  salvation.  We  are  none  of 
these  hard-hearted  persons  —  we  put  a  great  difference  between 
these  things.  There  may  be  something  absent  in  the  exterior 
regiment,  which  is  of  divine  right,  and  yet  salvation  to  be  had." 
"  This  mistake  proceedeth  from  not  distinguishing  between  the 
true  nature  and  essence  of  a  church,  which  we  do  readily  grant 
them,  and  the  integrity  or  perfection  of  a  church,  which  we  can- 
not grant  them,  without  swerving  from  the  judgment  of  the 
catholic  church." 

1)  Pres.  p.  144,  and  cap.  i.  p.  164. 


LECT.  XVI.]         THE   TESTIMONY    OF   ARCHBISHOP    WAKE.  ^99 

The  following  is  the  language  of  Archbishop  Wake  in  a  letter 
to  Le  Clerc,  as  given  by  Mr.  Bristed.^  "Ecclesias  reformatas, 
etsi  in  aliquibus  a  nostra  Anglicana  dlssentientes  libenter  amplec- 
tor.  Optarem  equidem  regimen  episcopale  bene  temperatum,  et 
ab  omni  injusta  dominatione  sejunctum,  quale  apud  nos  obtinet, 
et,  si  quid  ego  in  his  rebus  sapiam,  ab  ipso  apostolorum  a3Vo 
in  ecclesia  receptum  fuerit,  et  ab  iis  omnibus  retentum  fuisset ; 
nee  despero  quin  aliquando  restitutum,  si  non  ipse  videam,  at 
posteri  videbunt.  Interim  absit,  ut  ego  tam  ferrei  pectoris  sim, 
ut  ob  ejus  defectum,  (sic  mihl  absque  omni  invidia  appellare 
liceat)  aliquas  earum  a  communione  nostra  abscindendas  cre- 
dam  ;  aut  cum  quibusdam  furiosis  inter  nos  scriptorlbus,  eas 
nulla  vera  ac  valida  sacramenta  habere,  adeoque  vix  christianos 
esse  pronuntiem.  (Jnionem  arctiorem  inter  omnes  reformalos 
procurare  quovis  pretio  vellem." 

In  one  of  his  sermons  this  archbishop  expressly  says,  "  For 
us,  whom  it  hath  pleased  God,  by  delivering  us  from  the 
errors  and  superstitions  of  the  church  of  Rome,  to  unite  to- 
gether in  the  common  name  of  protestant  reformed  christians, 
were  we  but  as  heartily  to  labor  after  peace,  as  we  are  all  of 
us  very  highly  exhorted  to  it ;  I  cannot  see  why  we,  who  are  so 
happily  joined  together  in  a  common  profession  of  the  same 
faith,  at  least,  I  am  sure,  in  all  the  necessary  points  of  it,  and  I 
hope,  amidst  all  our  lesser  differences,  in  a  common  love  and 
charity  to  one  another,  should  not  also  be  united  in  the  same 
common  worship  of  God  too." 

"  This  makes  the  difference  between  those  errors  for  which 
we  separate  from  the  church  of  Rome,  and  those  controversies 
which  sometimes  arise  among  protestants  themselves.  The  for- 
mer are  in  matters  of  the  greatest  consequence,  such  as  tend  di- 
rectly to  overthrow  the  integrity  of  faith  and  the  purity  of  our 
worship;  and,  therefore,  such  as  are  in  their  own  nature  de- 
structive of  the  very  essentials  of  Christianity.  Whereas,  our  dif- 
ferences do  not  at  all  concern  the  foundations  either  of  faith  or 
worship,  and  are,  therefore,  such  in  which  good  men,  if  they  be 
otherwise  diligent  and  sincere  in  their  inquiry,  may  differ  with- 
out any  prejudice  to  themselves,  or  any  just  reflection  upon  the 
truth  of  their  common  profession." 

'•'  Indeed,  the  main  object  of  this  admirable  sermon  is,  to  ex- 
pose the  essential  characteristic  of  a  false  and  antichristian  irre- 
ligion  ;  namely,  the  desire  of  unchurching  and  excommunicating 
those  who  differ  from  its  professors  in  points  not  fundamental,  as 

1)  Thoughts,  &c.  pp.  427,  429. 


400  THE    TESTIMONY   OF   ARCHBISHOP   TISHER.  [lECT.  XVI. 

church  order  and  government,  rites,  ceremonies,  and  all  the  ex- 
terior of  public  worship." 

Archbishop  Usher  says,"  "  I  think  that  churches  that  have  no 
bishops,  are  defective  in  their  government :  yet  for  justifying 
my  communion  with  them,  which  I  do  love  and  honor  as  true 
members  of  the  church  universal,  I  do  profess,  if  I  were  in 
Holland,  I  should  receive  the  blessed  sacrament  at  the  hands  of 
the  Dutch,  with  the  like  affection  as  I  should  from  the  hands  of 
the  French  ministers,  were  I  at  Charenton."  "  To  this,"  says 
Mr.  Stuart,''  "  in  some  measure,  may  be  attributed  the  respect 
in  which  Usher  was  held  by  dissenters :  and  possibly  for  this, 
amongst  other  reasons,  he  is  said,  by  his  contemporary,  the  Rev. 
John  Livingston,  in  a  spirit  indicative  both  of  prejudice  and  can- 
dor, to  be  not  only  a  learned,  but  a  godly  man,  although  a 
bishop."^ 

From  the  Life  of  Archbishop  Usher,  by  Dr.  Nicholas  Ber- 
nard," it  appears  that  such  was  the  extent  to  which  he  carried 
his  liberal  views,  that  his  enemies  "  scandalized  him  to  King 
James,  under  the  title  of  Puritan,  of  purpose  to  prevent  any 
further  promotion  of  him."  These  misrepresentations  "  induc- 
ed him,  at  the  request  of  his  friends,  to  declare  his  judgment  as 
to  the  doctrine  and  discipline  of  the  Church  of  England,  which 
was,"  says  Dr.  Bernard,  "  to  all  good  men's  satisfaction."^ 

In  closing  his  view  of  the  Archbishop's  character.  Dr.  Ber- 
nard, who  was  long  his  intimate  and  familiar  friend,  says,**  "  He 
was  not  so  severe  as  to  disown  the  ministry  of  other  reform- 
ed churches,  but  declared  he  did  love  and  honor  them,  as 
true  members  of  the  church  universal,  and  was  ready  both  for 
the  ministers  of  Holland  and  France,  to  testify  his  communion 
with  them." 

In  Archbishop's  Usher's  Letter  on  the  Observation  of  the 
Lord's  day,  in  exposing  the  ignorance  and  mistakes  of  Dr. 
Heylin,^  he  denies  that  "  the  book  of  the  ordination  of  bish- 
ops" can  be  "  admitted  into  the  creed,"  "  because,"  says  Dr. 
Bernard,  "  they  are  either  for  the  most  part  to  be  reckoned 
among  the  agenda  rather  than  the  credenda." 

In  this  same  collection  Dr.  Bernard  publishes  a  letter,  written 
by  Archbishop  Usher,  not  long  before  his  death,  and  committed 
to  Dr.  Bernard  for  publication,*  "  containing  his  judgment  of  the 
ordination  of  the  ministers  in  France  and  Holland."  This  letter 

1)  Lettei-to  Dr.  Bernard  in  Bax-  5)  Ibid,  p.  51. 
ttr's  Life,  p.  2nc,.  C)  Ibid,  p.  104. 

2)  Hist.  Mem.  of  the  City  of  Ar-  7)  See  tlie   judgment  of  the  late 
mngh,  Newry,  1819,  p.  38.5.  Archbisliop  of  Armagh  and   Primate 

3)  Life  of  Mr.  John  Livingston,  of  Ireland,  &c.  by  Dr.  Bernard,  Lond. 
p.  IC.  1657,  p.  110. 

4)  Lond.  1C56,  p.  50.  8)  See  ibid,  p.  123. 


LECT.  XVI.]  TESTIMONY    OF   ARCHBISHOP   USHER.  401 

was  written  expressly  to  refute  an  allegation  that  he  "  regarded 
the  ministry  of  these  churches  as  null,  and  looked  on  them  as 
laymen."  "  I  have,"  says  Archbishop  Usher,  "  ever  declared 
my  opinion  to  be,  that  episcopus  ct  presbyter  gradu  tnntiim 
diffcrunt,  non  ordine,  and,  consequently,  that  in  places  where 
bishops  cannot  be  had,  the  ordination  by  presbyters  standeth 
valid,"  &c.  He  then  shows  his  belief  of  the  necessity  of  bish- 
ops, but  adds,  "  yet,  for  the  testifying  of  my  communion  with 
these  churches,  (which  I  do  love  and  honor  as  true  members  of 
the  church  universal,)  I  do  profess  that,  with  like  affection,  1 
should  receive  the  blessed  sacrament  at  the  hands  of  the  Dutch 
ministers,  if  I  were  in  Holland,  as  I  should  do  at  the  hands  of 
the  French  ministers,  if  I  were  in  Charenton."'  Dr.  Bernard 
testifies  that  he  knew  this  ever  to  have  been  his  opinion.^  That 
it  was  his  opinion,  he  repeats  again  and  again.^ 

But  further,  Dr.  Bernard  has  published,  as  given  to  him  for 
that  purpose,  Archbishop  Usher's  "  Reduction  of  Episcopacie 
unto  the  form  of  Synodical  Government,  received  in  the  An- 
cient Church."^  In  this  it  is  shown,  that  the  ancient  form  of 
church  government  was  by  the  council  of  presbyters,  over 
whom  there  was  a  president,  superintendent,  or  bishop.  But 
these  presbyters  ruled  in  common,  so  as  that  without  them  the 
bishop,  or  president,  could  do  nothing.  Dr.  Usher  proposed 
that  in  each  parish  the  rector,  or  incumbent  pastor,  together 
with  the  church-wardens,  and  sides-men,  may,  every  week, 
take  notice  of  such  as  live  scandalously,  he,  that  the  number 
of  suffragans,  answering  to  the  ancient  chorepiscopoi,  should  be 
increased,  who  might  call  together,  every  month,  all  the  pas- 
tors within  the  precinct,  and,  according  to  the  major  part  of 
their  voices,  conclude  all  matters.  In  like  manner  he  proposed 
that  there  should  be  a  diocesan  synod  held  every  year,  and  a 
provincial  synod  every  third  year,  constituted  in  like  manner, 
and  making  its  determinations  in  the  same  way.  In  signing  his 
name  to  this  plan,  he  declares  that  he  believes  it  to  be  accor- 
dant to  the  word  of  God,  "  and  that  the  suffragans,  mentioned  in 
the  second  proposition,  may  lawfully  use  the  power,  both  of 
jurisdiction  and  ordination,  according  to  the  word  of  God,  and 
the  practice  of  the  ancient  church." 

Now  that  this  scheme  is  substantially  presbyterian,  is  at  once 
apparent.  Indeed,  it  is  headed  in  the  publication,  "  Episcopal 
and  Presbyterial  Government  enjoined."  It  was  agreeable  to 
the  Puritans  generally.  It  overthrows  the  supremacy  of  prelates, 

1)  Ibid.  pp.  ]-J6,  127.  4)  Printed  Lond.  IGoG.  Proposed 

2)  Jbid,  p.  1'27.  in  the  year  1C41. 

3)  See  ibid,  p.  151. 

51 


402  TESTIMONY    OF   ARCHBISHOP    USHER.  [LECT.  XVI. 

and  if,  as  is  most  credibly  believed,  the  ancient  chorepiscopoi 
were  presbyters,  then  it  as  certainly  denies  to  prelates  the  exclu- 
sive power  of  ordination,  and  attributes  that  right  to  presbyters. 

Dr.  Bernard  further  assures  us,  that  in  the  judgment  of  Dr. 
Usiier,  all  that  can  be  deduced  from  the  promises  of  our  Sa- 
viour (as  in  Matt,  xxviii)  is,  that  Christ  thus  engaged  to  be  with 
"  the  whole  body  of  the  ministry  collectively,  then,  as  it  were, 
in  their  (the  apostles)  loins,  who  should  succeed  in  preaching 
and  baptism,"  and  not  to  prelates  :  and  that  all  that  is  inferri- 
ble from  the  teaching  of  scripture  (as  in  Heb.  vi.  2,)  is,  "that 
it  was  a  principle  of  the  catechism  taught  to  christians  at  their 
first  reception,  that  there  was  to  be  a  successive  oidinaiion,  or 
setting  apart  of  persons,  for  the  ministry,  for  an  authoritative 
preaching  of  faith  and  repentance,  and  administration  of  the 
sacraments ;"  which  would  assuredly  give  no  countenance  to  the 
doctrine,  that  this  ministry  was  to  be  divided  into  distinct  castes, 
and  the  power  of  ordination,  as  essential  to  the  being  of  a 
church,  be  limited  to  the  order  of  prelates.' 

In  further  illustration  of  these  liberal  views  of  Archbishop 
Usher,  we  would  quote  what  is  related  by  the  Rev.  Robert 
Blair,  a  very  eminent  presbyterian  minister,  who,  during  his 
primacy,  labored  for  some  time  in  Ulster.  Being  invited  in  the 
year  1627  to  visit  Dr.  Usher,  at  his  own  residence,  "I  com- 
plied," says  Mr.  Blair,'^  "  with  the  primate's  invitation,  and  found 
him  very  afi'able,  and  ready  to  impart  his  mind.  He  desired  to 
know  what  was  my  judgment  concerning  the  nature  of  justify- 
ing and  saving  faith.  1  told  him  in  general."  . .  .  .  "  From  ihis  he 
passed  on  to  try  my  mind  concerning  ceremonies ;  wherein  we 
were  not  so  far  from  agreeing  as  1  feared  :  for  when  I  had  freely 
opened  my  grievances,  he  admitted,  that  all  these  things  ought 
to  have  been  removed,  bui  the  constitution  and  laws  of  the 
place  and  time  would  not  permit  that  to  be  done.  He  added, 
that  he  was  afraid  our  strong  disaffection  to  these  would  mar  our 
ministry;  that  he  had  himself  been  importuned  to  stretch  forth 
his  hand  against  us;  and  that  though  he  would  not  for  the 
world  do  that,  he  feared  instruments  might  be  found  who  would 
do  it;  and  he  added,  that  it  would  break  his  heart,  if  our  suc- 
cessful ministry  in  the  north  were  interrupted.  Our  conference 
ending,  he  dismissed  me  very  kindly,  though  I  gave  him  no  high 
titles ;  and  when  trouble  came  upon  us,  he  proved  our  very 
good  friend,  as  will  appear  in  the  sequel." 

Mr.  Blair  having  been  silenced  by  the  bishop  of  Down,  he 
proceeded  to  London,  where   he   obtained   an  order  for  redress 

1)  See  Certain  Discourses  hy  the  2)  Life  of,  Edinb.  1754,  p.  64. 

late  Axclibishop   of  Armagh,   Lund. 
1657,  pp:  121,  162,  184. 


LECT.  XVI.]       TESTIMONY    OF    USHER,   AND    BISHOP    WHITE.  403 

from  ihe  king,  addressed  to  Strafford,  who  was  for  some  time 
absent.  "  At  last,"  says  Mr  Blair,i  "  that  magnificent  lord  hav- 
ing come  over  to  the  lieutenancy  of  Ireland,  1  went  to  Dublin, 
and  presented  his  majesty's  letter  to  him.  adding,  that  I  hoped 
for  a  ready  compliance  with  it.  But  the  haughty  man  did  alto- 
gether slight  that  order,  telling  me,  that  he  had  his  majesty's 
mind  in  his  own  breast.  He  reviled  the  church  of  Scotland, 
and  upbraided  me,  bidding  me  come  to  my  right  wits,  and  then 
I  should  be  regarded.  Which  was  all  the  answer  1  could  get 
from  him.  Witii  this  intelligence  I  went  to  Archbishop  Usher, 
which  was  so  disagreeable  to  him,  that  it  drew  tears  from  his 
eyes;  but  he  could  not  help  us." 

Baxter,  in  his  Five  Disputations  on  Church  Governnjent,^  in 
illustration  of  his  argument  that  moderate  episcopalians,  such  as 
Bishop  Hall  and  Archbishop  Usher,  would  agree  to  his  plan  of 
government,  alludes  to  the  scheme  of  Usher.  He  says  he  read  it 
in  manuscript,  and  offered  even  to  go  further  than  he  had,  for  the 
sake  of  accommodation.  After  stating  to  the  bishop  his  terms,  he 
asked  him  if  they  would  be  acceptable.  "They  are  sufficient," 
said  he,  "  and  moderate  men  would  accept  them,  but  others  will 
not,  as  I  have  tried,  for  many  of  them  are  offended  with  me  for 
propounding  such  terms."  "  And  thus,"  adds  Baxter,  "  this 
reverend  bishop  and  I  were  agreed  in  a  quarter  of  an  hour,  the 
truth  of  which  I  solemnly  profess,  and  I  leave  this  on  record  to 
posterity,  as  a  testimony  against  the  dividers  and  contenders  of 
this  age,  that  it  was  not  long  of  men  of  the  temper  and  princi- 
ples of  this  reverend  archbishop  and  myself,  that  the  episcopal 
party  and  their  dissenting  brethren  in  England  were  not  speedily 

and    heartily    agreed,  for    we    actually    did    it Let    this 

testimony  live,  that  posterity  may  know  whom  to  blame  for  our 
calamities;  they  all  extol  peace  when  they  reject  and  destroy 
it."3 

To  these  testimonies  may  be  added  that  of  Bishop  White.  It 
is  well  known  that  in  the  year  1782,  when  it  was  doubtful 
whether  an  American  episcopate  could  be  either  procured  or 
introduced.  Bishop  White  published  a  considerable  treatise,  in 
which  he  insisted,  that  for  the  time  being,  and  until  an  episco- 
pate could  be  conveniently  obtained,  the  churches  in  this  coun- 
try should  organize  themselves  into  one  body.  Tiiat  the  laity 
as  well  as  the  clergy  should  have  a  share  in  the  government,  and 

1)  Life,  p.  80  thousand    ejected    ministers    desired 

2;  Lond.  1659,  p.  345,  in  Library  confirmation  of  their  ordination  by  the 

of  the  Rev.  Shepard  K.  Kollock.  synods  fr«m  such  bishops   as  owned 

3)  Baxter,  in  his  True  and  Only  it,  —  from  Bishop  Usher  at  least,— 

Way  of  Concord,  Lond.  Ifi80,  pt.  iii.  of  others  1  am  uncertain." 

p.  8d,  also  suya,  that  some  of  the  two 


404  TESTIMONY    OF   BISHOP    WHITE.  [lECT.  XVI. 

form  distinct  associations ;  that  the  clergy  and  laity  together 
should  elect  a  permanent  president  over  each  convention,  whose 
duties  ouglit  not  materially  to  interfere  with  their  employments 
as  parochial  clergymen  ;  and  that  their  superintendence  should 
therefore  be  confined  to  small  districts.  This  superintendent, 
with  other  clergymen  appointed  by  the  body,  was  to  exercise 
spiritual  powers,  as  those  of  ordination  and  discipline  over  the 
clergy.  In  short,  this  proposed  organization  of  Bishop  White  was 
in  all  essential  features,  presbyterian  ;  embracing  even  a  recom- 
mendation of  its  superior  representative  judicatories  to  be  com- 
posed of  lay  and  clerical  delegates,  chosen  by  the  inferior  bodies, 
and  vesting  in  these  lay  and  clerical  representatives,  the  power  not 
only  of  electing,  but  also  of  depriving,  "  the  superior  order  of 
clergy." 

And  in  the  contemplation  of  a  continued  impracticability  in 
obtaining  the  episcopate,  Bishop  White  suggested  that  when 
"  afterwards  obtained,  any  supposed  imperfections  (and 
therefore  no  actual  invalidity  or  nonentity,  as  he  believed)  of  the 
intermediate  opcDinations  might,  if  it  were  judged  proper, 
(Bishop  White  evidently  not  regarding  such  a  procedure  as  at 
all  necessary,  although  such  ordinations  were  certainly  nothing 
more  than  presbyterian,)  be  supplied  WITHOUT  acknowledg- 
ing THEIR  NULLITY  by  a  Conditional  ordination,  resembling  that 
of  conditional  baptism  in  the  liturgy." 

This  organization  of  the  American  episcopal  churches,  and 
these  principles  upon  which  it  was  based.  Bishop  White  proved 
at  large,  to  be  consistent  with  the  principles,  opinions,  and  reason- 
ings, of  the  constitution,  and  of  standard  and  eminent  divines 
of  the  Church  of  England.  And  the  perfect  consistency  of  these 
principles  and  viev^'s  with  scripture  and  the  doctrine  of  the  Church 
of  England,  Bishop  White  continued  to  maintain  until  the  very 
close  of  his  life,  although  they  were  much  opposed  by  many  of  his 
brethren.  In  his  episcopal  charges  of  1807  and  1834,  he  intro- 
duced similar  doctrines,  as  also  in  a  letter  to  Bishop  Hobart  under 
date  December  1830.  In  this  letter  he  puts  to  shame  the  illiberal 
and  sectarian  views  of  that  prelate'  by  the  following  magnanimous 
declaration  :  "  In  agreement  with  the  sentiments  expressed  in 
that  pamphlet,  I  am  still  of  opinion  that,  in  an  exigency  in  which 
a  duly  authorized  ministry  cannot  be  obtained,  the  paramount 
duty  of  preaching  the  gospel  and  of  worshipping  God  on  the 
TERMS  of  the  CHRISTIAN  COVENANT,"   (so  that  there  may  be 

1)    Bishop    Hobart    "had  early  church  of  his  native  land.     He  advo- 

imbibed  the  Laudean  doctrines;  and  cated,  with  great  zeal  and  ability,  the 

spent  his  life  in  attempting  to  spread  system  set  forth  in  the  Oxf.  Tracts." 

them  throughout  the  infant  episcopal  Lend.  Christ.  Obs.  Oct.  1840,  p.  589. 


LETC.  XVI.]  TESTIMONY    OF   BISHOP    WHITE.  405 

covenanted  mercy  even  where  there  are  no  prelates,)  "  should 
go  on  in  the  best  manner  which  circumstances  permit.  In  re- 
gard to  the  episcopacy,!  think  that  it  should  be  sustained  as  the 
government  of  the  church  from   the  time  of  the  apostles,   but 

WITHOUT   CRIMINATING  the  MINISTRY  of  OTHER  CHURCHES, (!!!) 

as  is  the  case  with  the  Church  of  England."  Thus  does  this 
father  of  the  episcopal  church  in  America  renounce  for  him- 
self, for  his  church,  and  for  the  Church  of  England,  the  illib- 
eral, unchristian,  untenable,  and  suicidal  claims,  which  are  set 
forth  in  the  prelatic  doctrine  of  apostolical  succession.  By  ac- 
knowledging us  as  churches,  recognizing  our  ministry,  extending 
to  us  God's  covenanted  gifts,  and  persisting  nobly  against  the 
growing  pride  of  hierarchical  assumption,  he  thus  gives  to  the 
clergy  of  that  church  an  example,  by  following  which,  they 
may  maintain  the  unity  of  the  spirit  in  the  bonds  of  peace,  with 
all  their  christian  brethren.  Let  his  venerable  name  enshrine 
his  spirit,  and  these  his  sentiments,  in  the  heart  of  that  denomi- 
nation, of  which  he  was  a  foundation-stone. > 

Time  was,  when,  to  use  the  language  of  Bishop  White's  biog- 
rapher "  very  lax  (that  is,  very  liberal)  notions  on  the  subject  of 
episcopacy  were  adopted"  in  the  southern  states,  and  particularly 
in  South  Carolina,^  inasmuch  that  it  was  thought  there  was  no 
necessity  to  resort  to  foreign   bishops   to  obtain   the  succession, 

BUT    WE    MIGHT  APPOINT    AND   ORDAIN  THEM  FOR  OURSELVES. "^ 

May  these  sentiments,  which  would  naturally  lead  to  brotherly 
communion  among  different  denominations,  never  give  place  to 
that  system  of  high-church,  and  exclusive  pretensions,  which  is 
now  re-enkindling  the  slumbering  ashes  of  long-buried  feuds  and 
jealousies  among  us  ! 

1)  See,  for  authorities,  Dr.  Wil-  permission  to  the  member  of  another 
son's  Mem.  of  Bishop  White,  pp.  denomination  to  officiate  at  the  fune- 
80-87.  ral  of  one  of  his  flock  in  the  church- 

2)  Pp.  93,  94.  yard  of  an  episcopal  church.     See  his 

3)  Dr  Wilson's  Mem.  of  Bishop  letter,  in  Dr.  Wilson's  Life,  p.  398. 
White,  p.  94.  "It  is  most  strange,  See,  also.  Note  B.,  where  Bishop 
that  this  same  bishop  adopted  as  a  White's  views  are  further  illustrated, 
principle  of  conduct,  never   to  give 


ADDITIONAL  NOTES  TO  LECTURE  SIXTEENTH. 


NOTE  A. 


ADniTIONAL    TESTIMONIES. 

Some,  or  many  of  these  testimonies,  may  be  given  by  tiie  R.ev.  Dr.  Miller  in 
his  Worii  on  the  Ministry.  Jf  so,  as  I  iiave  not  for  some  lime  consulted  that 
work,  which  is  not  at  present  at  hand,  the  testimony  will  be  stronger,  as  having 
presented  itself  equally  to  both  inquirers. 

Tlie  sentiments  of  the  eminent  13ishop  Davknant^wIH  be  found  fully  given 
in  two  treatises  of  his  —  first,"  De  Pace  inter  Evangelicos  I'rocuranda  Johanni 
Duraeo  banc  suam  commentationem."  —  Second,  his  "  Adhortatio  ad  frater- 
nain  comniunionem  inter  Evancjelicas  ecclesias  restauraadurn.  in  eo  funda- 
ta.  quod  non  dissenliant  in  ujlo  fundamentali  calholicae  fidei  arliculo."  (Can- 
tabrigisB,  1640  ;    in  the  Old  South  Church  Lib.) 

On  page  17,  he  says,  "  Controversi;is  quce  reformatorum  ecclesias  jamdiu 
exercuerunt  et  defatigarunl,  non  esse  ejusmodi,  ut  sive  quis  ad  horuin  sive  illo- 
rum  sententiam  accedat,  a  Christo  et  fundamentali  fide  discedere  el  in  hanre- 
sin  fundamento  contrariam  incidere  judicetur,  triAM  MANicnTrBus  hisce,  non 
tarn  ecclesiarum  quam  scholarum  dissidiis,  commnnionem  fraternain  inter 
protestantium  ecclesias  universas  iniri  et  custodiri  posse  fateamur." 

"  Jam  singulorum  tandem  ilia  charitas  sit  qum  permittit  Christianas  erdesias 
nulla  jnsta  causa  prohibita,  fraternitati.s  dextras  mutuo  abnegare,  et  ab  ineun- 
da  unione  perpetuo  abhorrere."     (p.  22.) 

"  PorrO;  nullus  dubito  qujn  Ecelesiae  Saxonicae  HelveticfE  aliajque  quae  .«ive 
hisce  sive  illis  adslipulanlur,  agnoscant  se  ex  fraternam  communionem  cum 
hac  nostra  Anglicana,  Scotica,  Hibernica,  aliis  que  apud  esteros  relbrmatis 
ecclesiis  habere  ac  retinere  velle.  Cekte  ad  nos  quod  attinet,  quamvis 
non  illis   sufFragemur  in   omnibus  controversae   theologia;   apicibus,  fuatres 

TAMEN     IN      CHRISTO      AGNOSCIAIUS,      AC     FRATERNAM      ET     SAC  ROSANCTUM      NOS 
habere  CUM  ILLlS   COMMUNIONEM   PROTESTAM  UR."       (Do.  p.  2-1.) 

Cliapter  iii.  of  his  Adhortatio  is  "  de  UNico  person  ali  fundamento  iccleslae 
Medialore  Dei  et  hoininnm  Christo  Jesu,"  &c.  "  Hinc  appareat,  ecclesiis 
particularibus  quae  retinent  cum  lioc  fundamento  saluliftram  conjunctionein 
alias  ecclesias  nee  posie  nee  debere  renunciare  fraternam  communionem." 
"  Vcrum  enimvero  siquia  ecclesia,  alteram  quam  Christo  inajdificatam  non 
audet  negare,  audet  tamen  tanquam  membruin  pntridiun  abscindtre,  et  a  fra- 
terna  sua  communione  abjicere,  est  hoc  in  upsum  Christum  contumeliosum,  et 
in  fratres  non  modo  nostros  sed  Christi  injuriosum,"  p.  58.  (See  also  passim  ) 

Bishop  Meade,  (of  Virjrinia,)  in  his  Sermon  at  the  Consecration  of  Bishop 
Elliott,  (Washington,  1841,  appendix,  ch.  ix.  p.  93.)  says  : 

"  Let  me  now  show  in  some  particular  instances  how  by  tradition  they  wish 
to  support  some  high  views,  not  to  be  found  in  the  scriptures  or  book  of  coni- 
mnn  prayer.  We  have  seen  how  the  church  expresses  her  decided  convic- 
tion that  the  episcopal  form  of  government  is  scripuual  and  apostolic,  of 
course  worthy  of  all  to  be  received,  and  yet  not  undertaking  to  exclude  from 
the  covenant  those  who  have  not  that  torm.  The  Oxford  writers  in  like 
manner  make  occasional  concessions  and  exceptions,   wliich  seem  to  accord 


NOTES    TO   LECTURE    SIXTEENTH.  407 

with  Ihis  moderstion  of  the  church  ;  but  for  the  most  part,  in  a  manner  which 
tlieir  readers  cannot  reconcile,  hold  a  very  different  language. 

"  They  magnify  the  sacerdotal  office  beyond  all  bounds.  We  quote  from  the 
Essays  on  the  Church,  7th  edition,  408lh  page,  the  following  :  '  But  as  a  re- 
cent and  well-rounded  specimen  of  these  avowedly  high-church  doctrines, 
it  may  be  as  well  to  give  the  following  passage  from  the  last  publication  of 
thij  school,  the  new  volumes  of  Mr.  Froude's  Remains,  recently  given  to  the 
world  under  the  deliberate  sanction  of  Messrs.  Newman  and  Keble. 

"  The  reformed  Church  of  England  has  given  birlh  to  two  martyrs,  an 
archbishop  and  akintr,  (Arclibishop  Laud  and  Charles  I.)  and  both  these  bles- 
sed saints  died  for  episcopacy.  But  was  it  for  a  form,  or  a  point  of  discipline, 
that  they  resisted  thus  unto  death  .'  Surely  not.  When  they  contended  for 
episco|)acy  as  one  of  the  essentials  of  religion  ;  they  no  more  regarded  it  as 
an  external  and  a  form,  than  they  regarded  Christ's  death  upon  tlie  cross  as  an 
external  and  a  form. 

Their  belief  on  this  subject  seems  to  be  contained  in  the  following  prop- 
ositions : 

'•  1st.  That  before  Jesus  Christ  left  the  world  he  breathed  the  Holy  Spirit 
into  the  apostles,  jjiving  them  the  power  of  transmitting  this  precious  gill  to 
others  by  prayer  and  the  imposition  of  hands  ;  that  the  apostles  did  so  trans- 
mit it  to  others  ;  and  lliey  again  to  others;  and  that  in  this  way  it  has  been 
preserved  in  the  world  to  the  present  day. 

'•  I2d.  Th:it  liie  gift  thus  transmitted  empowers  its  possessors,  1st,  to  admit 
into,  and  exclude  from,  the  myst(>rious  communion  called  in  scripture  the 
kingdom  of  heaven,  any  one  whom  they  judge  deserving  of  it;  and  this, 
with  the  assurance  that  all  whom  they  admit  or  exclude  on  earth  and  exter- 
nally, are  admitted  or  excluded  in  heaven  and  spiritually,  in  the  sight  of  God 
and  holv  angels;  tiiat  it  empowers  them  to  bless  and  intercede  for,  those  who 
are  within  his  kingdom,  in  a  sense  in  which  no  other  man  can  bless  or  inter- 
cede. 2d.  To  make  the  eucharistic  bread  and  wine  the  body  and  t)lood  of 
Christ  in  the  sense  in  wiiicli  our  Lord  made  them  so.  3d.  To  enable  dele- 
gates to  periorm  this  great  miracle  by  ordaining  them  with  imposition  of 
hands. 

'•  According  to  this  view  of  the  subject,  to  di.spense  with  episcopal  ordina- 
tion is  to  be  regarded  not  as  a  breach  of  order  merely,  or  a  deviation  from 
apostolical  precedent,  hut  as  a  surrender  of  the  christian  priesthood,  a  rejec- 
tion of  all  the  powers  which  Christ  instituted  episcopacv  to  perpetuate  ;  and 
the  attempt  to  institute  any  other  form  of  ordination  for  it,  or  to  seek  com- 
munion with  Clirist,  through  any  non-episcopal  association,  is  to  be  re- 
garded not  as  schism  merely,  but  as  an  iiii/iossiiiilit!/." 

'•  In  iNos.  51  and  52  of  the  Tracts  we  have  these  strong  expressions  :  "  Christ 
never  appointed  two  ways  to  heaven  ;  nor  did  he  build  a  church  to  save  some, 
and  make  another  institution  to  save  other  men.  There  is  no  other  name 
given  under  heaven  among  men  whereby  we  can  be  saved,  but  the  name  of 
Jesns,  and  that  is  no  otherwise  given  under  heaven  than  in  the  church." 

'•  1  repeat  it,  the  eucharist  administered  without  apostolical  eommission, 
may  to  |)inu3  minds  he  a  very  edifying  ceremony,  but  it  is  not  th;it  l)lessed 
thing  which  our  Saviour  graeiously  meant  it  to  be:  it  is  not  verily  and  in- 
deed, taking  and  receiving  the  bodv  and  blood  of  him  our  incarnate  Lord." — 
Tract  52. 

"  In  Tract  No.  24,  8tli  page :  "  Whatever  be  our  private  differences  with  the 
Roman  catholics,  we  may  join  witli  them  in  condemning  socinians,  baptists, 
independents,  quakers,  and  the  like.  But  G<>d  forbid  tiiat  we  should  ally 
ourselves  with  tlie  offspring  of  heresy  and  schism,  in  our  contest  with  any 
branches  of  the  holy  church,  which  maintain  the  foundation,  whatever  may 
be  their  incidental  corruptions." 

The  ever-memorable  Hales,  of  Eaton,  in  his  tract  of  Schism,  holds  this  lan- 
guage :  "  And  besides  all  this  n)ischief,  (of  episcopal  ambition,)  it  is  founded 
in  a  vice  contrary  to  all  christian  humility,  without  which  no  man  shall  see 
his  S.iviour  :  lor  tliey  do  hut  abuse  themselves  and  otiiers.  that  would  per- 
suade >is  taat  bishops,  by  Christ's  institution,  have  any  superi  rity  ovfi  other 
men  further  than  of  rcverciice  ;  or  that  any  bishop  is  suixirior  to  another,  fui» 


408  NOTES    TO    LECTURE    SIXTEENTH. 

ther  than  positive  order  agreed  upon  amongst  christians  hath  prescribed. 
For  we  have  believed  him  who  hath  told  us,  "  That  in  Jesus  Christ  there  is 
neither  high  nor  low ;  and  that  in  giving  honor,  every  man  should  be  ready 
to  prefer  another  befoie  himself;"  (Rom.  xii.  10;)  which  saying  cut  off  all 
claim  most  certainly  to  superiority  by  title  of  Christianity,  except  men  can  think 
that  these  things  were  spoken  only  to  poor  and  private  men.  Nature  and  re- 
ligion agree  in  this,  that  neither  of  them  hath  a  hand  in  this  heraldry  of  secun- 
dc7n,  S7/b  et  supra :  all  this  comes  from  composition,  and  agreement  of  men 
among  themselves.  Wherefore  this  abuse  of  Christianity  to  make  it  lacquey  to 
ambition,  is  a  vice  for  which  I  have  no  extraordinary  name  of  ignominy,  and  an 
ordinary  I  will  not  give  it,  lest  you  should  take  so  transcendent  a  vice  to  be 
but  trivial." 

Dr.  Samuel  Halifax,  (the  same  we  believe  who  is  so  well  known  as  the  bish- 
op of  Winchester,)  in  his  "  Three  Sermons,  occasioned  by  an  attempt  to  Abol- 
ish Subscription  to  the  XXXIX  Articles,"  and  preached  before  the  university 
of  Cambridge,  (Cambridge,  1772,  third  ed.  p.  5,  6,)  speaking  of  those  who 
dissent  from  motives  of  conscience  from  the  established  worship,  he  character- 
izes them  as  "  differing  from  us  in  points  of  discipline  rather  than  of  doctrine." 
He  adds,  "  If  for  reasons  of  prudenck  and  to  secure  the  existence  of  the 
national  church,  we  think  ourselves  justified  from  the  clearest  principles  of  the 
LAW  of  NATIONS,  in  cxcludiog  them,"  «fec. 

Dr.  Clagetl,  also  an  eminent  episcopalian,  thus  speaks  :  (Notes  of  the  Ch.  pp. 
184  and  193:)  "  But  then  we  expect  that  the  Church  of  England,  the  Luther- 
ans, and  the  Calviiiists,  should  be  heard  too,  when  to  the  papists  charging 
them  with  soine  differences,  they  make  the  same  answer,  that  they  have  all  the 
same  faith,  especially  since,  when  they  come  to  prove  the  truth  of  what  they 
say,  they  will  show  that  the  matters  wherein  thev  differ  do  not  break 
the  unitv  of  the  catholic  faith." 

See  also  Paley's  Sermon  on  a  Distinction  of  Orders  in  the  Church,  in  Wks. 
vol.  vi.  p.  91,  &c.  and  p.  93.  "If  we  concede  to  other  churches  the  christian 
legality  of  their  constitution,  so  long  as  christian  worship  and  instruction  are 
competently  provided  for,  we  may  be  allowed  to  maintain  the  advantage  of  our 
own,  upon  principles  which  all  parties  acknowledge — considerations  of  public 
utility." 

In  his  Discourse  on  "  The  Conformity  of  the  Church  of  England  to  Apos- 
tolic Precept  and  Pattern"  (London,  1834,  page  22,)  the  Rev.  flartwell 
Home  thus  speaks:  "  Once  more,  while  you  are  devoutly  grateful,  that  you 
are  members  of  a  church  whose  moderation  and  liberality  toward  christians  of 
other  communions  are  commended  by  all,  except  the  enemies  of  all  religion  : 
endeavor  to  imbibe  the  social,  generous,  fervent,  sympathizing  spirit,  which 
breathes  in  every  page  of  her  liturgy  ;  and  while,  in  the  exercise  of  your 
inalienable  right  of  j)iivate  judgment,  you  deliberately  prefer  her  communion, 
show  to  all  wlio  profess  conscientiously  to  differ  from  you,  the  more  excellent 
way  of  active  christian  charity,  by  imputing  to  them  no  sinister  motives  for 
their  dissent;  by  uniting  with  them  in  every  act  of  holy  and  christi;in  benevo- 
lence, in  which  you  can  cordially  cooperate  ;  and  by  praying  for  their  spirit- 
ual welfare,  that  they  all  '  may  hold  the  faith  in  unity  of  spirit,  in  the  bond  of 
peace  and  righteousness  of  life.'  " 

Bishop  Heber  says,  (Serm.  in  Engl.  p.  24G,)  "  1  am  no  ways  concerned  to 
deny  that,  as  in  cases  of  extreme  public  danger,  every  citizen  is  a  soldier  ;  so 
situations  may  be  conceived,  (thouirh  I  am  not  aware  that  any  such  have  oc- 
curred since  the  first  preaching  of  tiie  gosiiel,)  in  which  any  christian  may  be 
autiiorized  and  called  upon  to  act  as  a  minister  of  religion.  Far  less  would  I 
refuse  to  acknowledge  that  many  of  these  self-constituted  ministers,  whose 
number  I  deplore,  have  shown  a  zeal  in  the  service  of  our  Lord  and  theirs, 
which  may  well  call  forth  our  admiration,  and  our  godly  jealousy." 

Mr  Tnplady,  in  his  Church  cif  England  Vindicated,  says,  "  Nor  does  it  fol- 
low that  the  Church  of  England,  in  believing  for  herself  the  necessity  of 
episcopal  ordination,  does  thereby  unchurch  those  of  the  reformed  churches 
abroad,  which  have  no  bishops,  any  more  than  that  those  churches  unchurch 
us  for  retaining  our  excellent  and  primitive  mode  of  ecclesiastical  govern- 
ment." 


NOTES    TO    LECTURE    XVI.  409 

So  also  Mr.  Gisborne  in  his  Duties  of  Men  says,  "  it  is  now  admitted  by 
the  generality  of  protcstants,  that  no  command  was  delivered,  either  by 
Christ,  or  by  his  apostles,  assigning  to  the  christian  church  any  specific,  un- 
alterable form  of  government ;  but,  that  while  various  offices,  suited  to  the 
situation  and  exigencies  of  the  new  converts,  were  instituted  at  the  begin- 
ning, some  of  which,  as  that  of  deaconesses,  have  long  fallen  into  disuse, 
christians  were  left  at  liberty  to  adopt  in  future  times  such  modes  of  eccle- 
siastical administration  and  discipline,  as  they  should  deem  most  eligible,  in 
the  circumstances  under  which  they  should  find  themselves  placed." 

Similar  is  the  judgment  of  Milner,  in  his  Church  History,  (chap,  i,  art.  11, 
vol.  i,  p.  141,  Eng.  ed.  see  also  p.  445.)  "  In  vain,  I  think,  will  almost  any 
modern  church  whatever  set  up  a  claim  to  exact  resemblance.  Usher's  model 
of  reduced  episcopacy  seems  to  come  the  nearest  to  the  plan  of  the  primi- 
tive churches.  It  has  been  an  error  common  to  all  parties,  to  treat  these 
lesser  matters,  as  if  they  were  jure  divino,  or  like  the  laws  of  the  Medes 
and  Persians,  unalterable.  Could  it,  however,  conveniently  be  done,  it  may 
perhaps  be  true  that  a  reduced  episcopacy,  in  which  the  dioceses  are  of  small 
extent,  as  those  in  the  primitive  church  undoubtedly  were,  and  in  which  the 
president,  residing  in  the  metropolis,  exercises  a  superintendency  over  ten  or 
twelve  presbyters  of  the  same  city  and  neighborhood,  would  bid  the  fairest 
to  promote  order,  peace,  and  harmony." 

Sir  Matthew  Hale,  in  his  "  Judgment  of  the  Nature  of  True  Religion,  and 
the  Causes  of  its  Corruption  "  in  enumerating  the  mischiefs  resulting  from 
scholastics,  says,  "  But  if  we  observe  many  persons  in  the  world,  we  shall  find 
some  so  highly  devoted  to  this  or  that  particular  form  of  government,  as  if  all 
the  weight  of  the  christian  religion  lay  in  it :  though  the  wise  and  sober  sort 
of  conformists  know  and  profess  this,  yet  there  be  some  rash  people  that  will 
presently  unchurch  all  the  reformed  churches  beyond  the  seas  which  are  not 
under  episcopal  government:  that  if  they  see  a  man,  otherwise  of  orthodox 
principles,  of  a  pious  and  religious  life,  yet  if  scrupling  some  points  of  ecclesi- 
astical government,  though  peaceable,  they  will  esteem  him  little  better  than 
a  heathen  or  publican,  a  schismatic,  heretic,  and  what  not :  on  the  other  side, 
if  they  see  a  man  of  great  fervor  in  asserting  the  ecclesiastical  government, 
observant  of  external  ceremonies,  though  otherwise  of  a  loose  and  dissolute 
life,  yet  they  will  be  ready  to  applaud  him  with  the  style  of  a  son  of  the  church, 
and  upon  that  account  overlook  the  miscarriages  of  his  life,  as  if  the  essence 
and  life  of  christian  religion  lay  in  the  baro  asserting  of  the  best  form  of  eccle- 
siastical government." 

"  Come  to  the  reformed  episcopal  clergy :  as  to  the  pope's  supremacy  they 
disclaim  it ;  but  if  you  acknowledge  not  episcopal  government,  if  you  swear 
not  canonical  obedience  to  your  ordinary,  if  you  submit  not  to  the  liturgy,  and 
ceremonies,  and  vestments,  and  music,  used  in  the  church,  you  are  at  best  a 
schismatic." 

To  these  testimonies,  it  may  be  interesting  to  add  that  of  Lord  Bacon, 
(in  Price's  Hist,  of  Prot.  Nonconf.  vol.  i.  p.  443,  in  Wks.  vol.  vii.  p.  48;) 
"  Then,"  says  he,  that  is,  in  the  early  part  of  Elizabeth's  reign,  "  were  they 
content  mildly  to  acknowledge  many  imperfections  in  the  church  ;  as  tares 
come  up  amongst  the  corn,  which  yet,  accordino  to  the  wisdom  taught  by  the 
Saviour,  were  not  with  strife  to  be  pulled  up,  lest  it  might  spoil  and  supplant 
the  good  corn,  but  to  grow  on  together  till  the  harvest.  After,  they  grew  to  a 
more  absolute  defence  and  maintenance  of  all  the  orders  of  the  church,  and 
stifily  to  hold  that  nothing  was  to  be  innovated  ;  partly  because  it  needed  not, 
partly  because  it  would  make  a  breach  upon  the  rest.  Hence,  exasperated 
through  contentions,  they  are  fallen  to  a  direct  condemnation  of  the  contrary 
part,  as  of  a  sect  Yea,  and  some  indiscreet  persons  have  been  bold  in  open 
preaching  to  use  dishonorable  and  derogatory  speech  and  censure  of  the 
churches  abroad  ;  and  that  so  far.  as  some  of  our  men,  as  I  have  heard,  ordain- 
ed in  foreign  parts,  have  been  pronounced  to  be  no  lawful  ministers." 

See  this  also  fully  shown  by  the  author  of  "  The  Rights  of  the  Christian 
Church,"  himself  a  member  of  it,  and  when  defending  it  against  the  non-jurors. 
(Lond.  1707,  ed.  third,  pp.  337  —  343.) 

Our  position  is  reluctantly  but  fully  admitted  by  Dr.  How,  in  his  Vindica- 

52 


410  NOTES    TO    LECTURE    XVI. 

tion.  (p.  48G.)  '•  The  episcopal  church,  it  is  true,  no  where  sajs,  in  so  many 
words,  that  episcopal  imposition  of  hands  is  necessary  to  outward  ordination  ; 
or,  which  is  the  same  thing,  that  the  visible  church  cannot  exist  without  epis- 
copacy. She  has  not  thought  it  necessary  or  proper  formally  to  make  such  a 
declaration  ;  but  that  this  is  the  fair  and  inevitable  conclusion  from  her  stan- 
dards, would  seem  scarcely  to  admit  of  a  reasonable  doubt." 

That  such  a  conclusion  is  not  either  inevitable  or  fair,  we  shall  find  to  be  the 
opinion  of  perhaps  as  capable  commentators  upon  the  standards  of  the  Angli- 
can church  as  Dr.  How  himself 

See  Mason's  Vindication  of  the  Ordination  of  the  Reformed  Churches.  See 
also  Dr.  Scott  on  Notes  of  the  Church,  pp.  199,  201. 


NOTE   B. 

THE  SENTIMENTS  OF  THE  LATE  BISHOP  WHITE,  CONTINUED. 

Hating,  after  great  research,  succeeded  in  procuring  a  copy  of  "  The  Case 
of  the  Episcopal  Churches  in  the  United  States  considered,"  published  by 
Bishop  White,  in  Philadelphia,  in  the  year  1762,  (printed  by  David  C.  Clay- 
pole,)  I  will  annex  some  little  account  of  it,  so  far  as  it  bears  upon  the  ob- 
jects in  hand. 

The  motto  on  the  title-page  is  itself  significant  of  the  spirit  of  the  whole 
pamphlet.  It  is  as  follows  :  "  To  make  new  articles  of  faith  and  doctrine,  no 
man  thinketh  it  lawful;  new  laws  of  government,  what  commonwealth  or 
church  is  there  which  maketh  not  at  one  time  or  other." — Hooker. 

Not  less  plain  is  the  announcement  made  in  the  Preface.  "  Nothing  is  fur- 
ther li-om  his  wishes  than   the   reviving  of  such  controversies  as  have  been 

found  destructive  of  good  neighborhood  and  the  christian  temper He 

has,  for  this  reason,  avoided  the  discussion  of  subjects  on  which  episcopalians 
differ  from  their  fellow-christians." 

In  the  first  chapter,  the  relation  in  which  the  episcopal  churches  in  this 
country  stood  to  the  English  church,  as  constituting  a  part  of  the  diocese  of 
London,  is  shown.  It  is  then  remarked:  "  All  former  jurisdiction  over  the 
churches  being  thus  withdrawn,  and  the  chain  which  held  them  together 
broken,  it  would  seem  that  their  future  continuance  can  be  provided  for  only 
by  VOLUNTARY  associations  for  union  and  good  government."  (p.  18.) 

In  chapter  ii.  he  illustrates  the  rights  of  the  laity.  "  The  power  of  electing 
a  superior  order  of  ministers,  ought  to  be  in  the  clergy  and  laity  together." 
(p.  10.)  ''  Deprivation  of  the  superior  order  of  clergy,  should  also  be  in  the 
church  at  large."  (p.  10.)  In  consequence  of  the  difficulty  of  providing  for 
the  support  of  the  superior  order  of  cler.cry,  "  of  consequence  the  duty  assigned 
to  that  order  ought  not  materially  to  inTerfere  with  their  employments  in  the 
station  of  parochial  clergy  ;  the  superintendent  of  each  will,  therefore,  be  con- 
fined to  a  small  district,  a  favorite  idea  with  all  moderate  episcopalians." 
(p.  11.) 

The  author  then  proceeds  to  offer  a  sketch  of  a  frame  of  government. 

In  refuting  the  objection  to  the  anti-republican  character  of  episcopacy,  he 
remarks  that  "in  the  early  ages  of  the  church,  it  was  customary  to  debate  and 
determine  in  a  general  concourse  of  all  christians  in  the  same  city ;  among 

WHOM    the    bishop    WAS    NO    MORE    THAN    PRESIDENT."    (p.  18  ) 

In  reference  to  carrying  the  plan  into  immediate  execution,  he  says: 
"  This  is  founded  on  the  presumption  that  the  worship  of  God  and  the  refor- 
mation of  I  he  people,  are  the  principal  objects  of  ecclesiastical  discipline  ;  if  so, 
to  relinquish  them  from  a  scrupulous  adherence  to  episcopacy,  is  sacri- 
ficing THE  substance  TO  THE  CEREMONY."  (p.  19.)  "Are  the  acknowledged 
ordinances  of  Christ's  holy  religion  to  be  suspended  for  years  .  .  .  out  of 
delicacy  to  a  disputed  point,  and  that  relating  only  to  EXTER- 
NALS .'"  "  If  the  episcopal  succession  should  be  afterwards  obtained,  any 
supposed  imperfections  of  the  intermediate  ordinations  might,  if  it  were 
judged  proper,  be  supplied,  without  acknowledging  their  nullity,  by  a 
conditional  ordination,  resembling  that  of  conditional  baptism  in  the  liturgy. 


NOTES    TO    LECTURE    XVI.  411 

The  above  was  an  expedient  proposed  by  Archbishop  Tillotson,  Bishops  Pa- 
trick, StiUingfleet  and  others,  at  the  revolution,  and  had  been  actually  practised 
in  Ireland,  by  Archbishop  Bramhall."  (pp.  1!),  20.) 

In  proceeding  to  chapter  v.  he  again  speaks  of  the  episcopal  succession,  as 
"  a  point  of  external  order,"  (p.  20.)  and  goes  on  fully  to  substantiate  the  posi- 
tion that  his  proposed  "  departure  from  episcopacy  in  the  present  instance, 
would  be  warranted  by  her  doctrines,  by  her  practice,  and  by  the  principles 
on  which  episcopal  government  is  asserted."  (p.  20.) 

He  shows  from  the  language  of  the  articles  and  canons,  that  the  Church  of 
England  does  not  consider  the  episco|)al  succession  as  much  binding  as  bap- 
tism and  the  Lord's  supper,  (p.  21.) 

He  shows  that,  in  the  practice  of  the  Church  of  England,  foreign  divines, 
presbyterially  ordained,  were  not  subject  to  re-ordination,  and  quotes  Burnet, 
who,  in  his  History  of  His  Own  Times,  anno  1061,  says,  that  this  was  the  case 
until  the  act  of  uniformity  passed  soon  after  the  restoration." 

After  laying  down,  as  he  says,  "  concisely,  but  as  is  believed  impartially," 
the  doctrine  of  apostolical  succession,  he  asks,  (p.  24,)  "  Can  anv  reasonable 

RULE  of  construction  MAKE  THIS  AMOUNT  TO  MORE  THAN  ANCIENT  AND  APOS- 
TOLIC PRACTICE  .''  That  the  apostles  emploj'ed  any  particular  form,  affords  a 
presumption  of  its  being  the  best,  all  circumstances  at  that  time  considered  ; 
but  to  make  it  unalterably  binding,  it  must  be  shown  enjoined  in  positive  pre- 
cept." He  then  quotes,  with  approbation.  Bishop  Hoadly,  who  denies  "  the 
divine  appointment  of  the  three  orders."  (p.  24.) 

Again  he  says,  (p.  26  :)  "  It  cannot  be  denied  that  some  writers  of  the 
Church  of  England,  apply  very  strong  expressions  to  episcopacy,  calling  it  a 
divine  appointment,  the  ordinance  of  Christ,  and  the  law  of  God,  and  pro- 
nounce it  to  be  of  divine  right.  Yet  in  reason,  they  ought  to  be  understood 
only  as  asserting  it  to  be  binding  wherever  it  can  be  conveniently  had." 
"  Much  more  must  they  think  so,  who  venerate  and  prefer  that  form  as  the 
most  ancient  and  eligible,  but  without  any  idea  of  divine  right  in  the  case. 
THIS  THE  AUTHOR  BELIEVES  TO  BE  THE  SEiNTlMENT  OF  THE 
GREAT  BODY  OF  EPISCOPALIANS  IN  AMERICA  ;  in  which  respect, 
they  have  in  their  favor  unquestionably  the  sense  of  the  Church  of  England, 
and,  as  he  believes,  the  opinions  of  her  most  distinguished  prelates  for 
piety,  virtue  and  abilities."  (p.  28.) 

"  The  churches  in  each  small  district  should  associate  together.  In  every 
such  district  there  should  be  elected  a  general  convention,  consisting  of  a  con- 
venient number  (the  minister  to  be  one)  from  the  vestry  or  congregation  of 
each  church."  "  They  should  select  a  clergyman  their  permanent  president; 
who,  in  conjunction  with  other  clergymen,  to  be  also  appointed  by  the  body, 
may  exercise  such  powers  as  are  purely  spiritual,  particularly  that  of  ad- 
mitting to  the  ministry,'  &c.  (p.  12.)  "The  assemblies  in  the  three  lar- 
ger districts  may  consist  of  a  convenient  number  of  members,  sent  from  each 
of  the  smaller  districts  severally,  within  their  bounds,  equally  composed  of 
clergy  and  laity,  and  voted  for  by  those  orders  promiscuously,  the  presiding 
clergyman  to  be  always  one  ;  and  these  bodies  to  meet  once  in  every  year." 
(Ibid.)  "The  continental  representative  body  may  consist  of  a  convenient 
number  from  each  of  the  larger  districts,  formed  equally  of  clergy  and  laity, 
and  among  the  clergy,  formed  equally  of  presiding  ministers  and  others;  to 
meet  statedly,  once  in  three  years."  "  The  use  of  this  and  the  preceding  rep- 
resentative bodies,  is  to  make  such  regulations  and  receive  appeals  in  such 
matters  only  as  shall  be  judged  necessary  for  their  continuing  one  religious 
communion."    (p.  13.) 

"  It  is  presumed,"  he  remarks  on  p.  14,  "  the  episcopalians  generally  are 
attached  to  that  characteristic  of  their  communion  which  prescribes  a  settled 
form  of  prayer."    (p.  14.) 

In  chapter  iv.  he  comes  to  speak  of  the  episcopal  succession,  and  after 
showing  that  this  could  not  then  be  obtained  from  England,  he  remarks,  "  Now, 
on  the  one  hand  to  depart  from  espiscopacy.  would  be  giving  up  a  leading 
characteristic  of  the  communion,  which,  however  indifferently  consid- 
ered, as  to  divine  appointment,  might  be  productive  of  all  the  evils  gener- 
ally attending  evils  of  this  sort."     He   therefore  proposes  "  to   include  in  the 


412  NOTES    TO    LECTURE    XVI. 

proposed  frame  of  government,  a  general  approbation  of  episcopacy,  and  a 
declaration  of  an  intention  to  procure  the  succession  as  soon  as  convenient- 
ly may  be  ;  but  in  the  mean  time  to  carry  the  plan  into  effect,  without  wait- 

ING  FOR  THE  SUCCESSION."      (p.  17.) 

Once  more,  in  his  episcopal  charge  delivered  in  the  year  1834,  (The  Past  and 
the  Future,  IS34,  p.  14,  15,)  he  declares  that,  while  bound  to  sustain  the  integ- 
rity of  their  system,  "  there  is  not  perceived  the  necessity  of  carrying  it  to  the 
extreme  of  denouncing  all  conununions  destitute  of  the  episcopacy,  as  depart- 
ing from  the  essentials  of  the  christian  faith,  and  as  aliens  from  the  covenants 
of  promise."  This  medium,  he  asserts  to  be  the  positicm  advocated  by  the 
articles  and  ordinal  of  the  Church  of  England,  and  then  adds,  "  if  there  should 
be  any  among  us  who  make  larger  conclusions  from  the  same  premises,  it  is 
matter  of  private  opinion,  and  not  to  be  obtroded  as  the  determination  of 

the  CHURCH.  ' 

The  Rev.  Benjamin  Allen  of  St.  Paul's,  Philadelphia,  in  his  Letter  to  Bishop 
Ilobart,  (Philadelphia,  1827,  p.  7,)  asks,  "  Are  not  your  sentiments  concerning 
otiier  denominations  —  giving  them  over  to  the  uncovenanted  mercies  of  God 
—  altogether  contrary  to  those  of  Bishop  White  .''  declared  by  him  to  be  coun- 
ter to  the  formularies  of  the  Church  of  England,  and  contrary  to  those  of  the 
reformers.  Were  they  not  condemned  by  the  house  of  bishops  in  the  reign  of 
Queen  Anne,  as  strange  conceits  ?  Are  they  not  precisely  those,  as  to  matters 
of  church,  held  by  the  Jacobites  or  friends  of  the  Pretender,  and  again  by  the 
tories .'  (See  Burnet,  Warner's  Eccl.  Hist.,  &c.)  Are  they  not  sentiments 
directly  opposed  to  the  whole  of  the  policy  of  the  whole  of  the  life  of  the  pre- 
siding bishop.'" 

"  You"  (Bishop  Hobart)  "  are  opposed  (in  your  doctrines  and  views  of  polity) 
to  the  views  of  the  Church  of  England,  of  the  protestant  episcopal  church  in 
America,  of  the  senior  bishop  of  that  church,  of  the  reformers,  of  the  noble 
army  of  martyrs,  of  the  primitive  church,  of  the  glorious  company  of  tiie  apos- 
tles, of  the  word  of  the  Most  High  God  ;  and  this  I  mean  to  prove  by  fair  ref- 
erence to  your  writings  and  doings  during  the  whole  of  your  ecclesiastical  ca- 
reer."    (P.  29.) 

"  Where  is  the  concord  in  sentiment  between  these  gentlemen,"  (Bishop 
White  and  Dr.  Onderdonk,)  asks  the  episcopal  author  of"  Review  of  the  An- 
swer to  the  Remonstrance  sent  to  the  Bishops  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
Church."  (Philadelphia,  1827.  in  the  Loganian  Library,  No.  2235.)  "The 
former,  during  a  life  which  has  been  fruitful  in  incident ;  which  has  witnessed 
every  form  of  popular  prejudice  ;  which  has  passed  through  scenes  of  civil 
revolution  ;  has  not  during  the  whole  lapse  of  his  fourscore  years,  outraged 
the  feelings  of  other  denominations  to  so  great  an  extent,  as  the  latter  has  done 
by  a  solitary  act  —  an  act,  the  index  of  his  career.  Let  any  one  read  the  ex- 
pression of  sentiments  by  Bishop  White,  whether  in  the  pamphlets  of  '83,  or 
the  chronicle  of  the  episcopal  church,  published  in  1820,  and  compare  these 
with  the  ultra  opinions  of  the  Doctor.  Behold  the  former  surrounded  in  his 
study  by  the  representatives  of  every  christian  communion,  guiding  the  sacra- 
mental host  to  the  godlike  work  of  dispensing  the  Bible  to  each  cottage  in  the 
land  ;  then  read  what  the  latter  says  about  such  a  union.  Is  the  former  to 
descend  from  this  moral  elevation .'  Are  these  bonds  to  be  riven  by  views  not 
recognized  by  the  Church  of  England,  the  pretestant  episcopal  church  of  Amer- 
ica, or  the  inspired  volume .'  Is  the  bishop  to  say  to  those  with  whom  he 
walked  in  brotherly  agreement  fourscore  years ;  over  whose  general  institu- 
tions he  has  presided  in  harmony,  &c., '  I  have  learned  that  you  have  no  part 
in  the  gospel  covenant.'"  While  just  on  the  verge  of  the  Jordan  of  death,  is  he 
to  shake  bands  and  part  with  those  with  whom  he  has  reached  that  verge  in 
concord  .'  Is  he  to  tell  them,  'You  are  no  portion  of  the  flock  of  the  Lord  .' 
You  will  find  mercy,  doubtless ;  but  there  is  no  covenanted  mercy  for  you  ?  ' 
Will  Bishop  White  do  this.?  never."  (the  author's  capitals,  p.  11  and  12.) 

See,  also,  Bishop  White's  Lectures  on  the  Catechism,  Philadelphia,  1813, 
Dissert,  x.  p.  425,  426. 


LECTURE    XVII. 


THE  PRELATICAL  DOCTRINE  OF  APOSTOLICAL  SUCCESSION  SCHISMATICAL 
IN    ITS    TENDENCIES    AND    RESULTS. 

The  only  passage  in  the  Bible  in  which  the  term  schism  is 
employed  in  an  abstract  sense,  is  1  Cor.  xi.  14-27.  It  evi- 
dently imports  here  such  a  derangement  of  the  harmony  and 
brotherhood  of  a  church,  as  would  be  found  in  the  human  body, 
were  the  different  members  selfishly  to  confine  their  functions  to 
their  own  exclusive  benefit.  Schism,  therefore,  exists  when  the 
members  of  an)"-  particular  church,  or  when  any  particular 
churches,  are  found  alienated  from  other  members  or  churches, 
and  not  co-operating  with  them  in  the  harmonious  advancement 
of  the  common  interests  and  welfare  of  the  whole  body. 

The  term  has  come  to  signify  an  actual  separation  or  division 
in  a  church  or  denomination  of  christians ;  and  is  currently  ap- 
plied by  prelatists,  who  assume  that  they  exclusively  constitute 
this  church,  to  all  other  denominations  of  christians  not  in  sub- 
jection to  their  ecclesiastical  dominion.' 

1)  The  Rev.  Thomas  H.  Vail,  palians  ;  who,  until  of  recent  years, 

in    his    recently    published    volume,  were  in  fact,  and   in  the   literal   and 

"The  Comprehensive  Church, "(Hart-  correct  sense  of  the  term,  dissenters; 

ford,  1841,  p.  54,)  in  introducing  the  who  assumed  the  attitude  of  promul- 

term  dissenter  as  descriptive  of  other  gators    of   a   denominational    system, 

denominations,  takes  occasion   to  ad-  hardly  as  yet  known  ;  and  who  were 

vise  us  that  this  is  "  a  title  of  familiar  uniformly  regarded  and  spoken  of  as 

and  appropriate  use,  and  which  we  wish  dissenters.  Of  this,  we  shall  have  occa- 

to  be  understood  we  employ  most  respect-  sion  to  produce  evidence.    Meantime 

fully."     Now,  truly  a  man  cannot  be  we  remark,  that  all  those  ecclesiastical 

respectful   in  affirming  that  to  be  ap-  establishments  being  overthrown,  the 

propriate,  which  is  so  only  to  the  lips  prelacy,  in   attempting  to  perpetuate 

O-   high-church    or   Romish   bigotry;  such  terms,  brands  itself  as  "  the  sec- 

and    who    uses    words  in   a  sense  in  tarian,"  and  not  "  the  comprehensive 

which  they  have  710  7fteaHino-,  or  if  any,  church,"   uuless   this   term  indeed  is 

ft  wrong  one;  since,  in  New  England,  to   be   understood   in  a  prelatic  sense, 

where  the  author  lives,  the  term  dis-  as    including    all   who  can   embrace 

senter  was  long  "  familiar  and  ap-  prelacy  !  ! 
PROPRIATE,"  as  applicable  to  episco- 


414  SCHISM    AS   DESCRIBED   BY    THE   FATHEKS.       [lECT.  XVII. 

It  is  wonderful  with  what  fearfulness  and  terror  this  term  has 
become  associated  ;  so  that  the  very  mention  of  it  calls  up  the 
images  of  death  and  perdition,  excommunication  and  anathema. 
It  has  been  observed  by  that  very  learned  and  judicious  divine, 
as  Stillingfleet  calls  him,  the  Rev.  Mr.  Hales  of  Eaton,'  that  "  her- 
esy and  schism,  as  they  are  commonly  used,  are  two  theological 
scarecrows,  with  which  they  who  use  to  uphold  a  party  in  relig- 
ion, use  to  fright  away  such  as  are  making  inquiry  into  it,  are 
ready  to  relinquish  and  oppose  it,  if  it  appear  either  erroneous 
or  suspicious.  For  as  Plutarch  reports  of  a  painter,  who  having 
unskilfully  painted  a  cock,  chased  away  all  other  cocks,  that  so 
the  imperfection  of  his  art  might  not  appear  by  comparison  with 
nature.  So  men,  willing  for  ends  to  admit  of  no  fancy  but  their 
own,  endeavor  to  hinder  an  inquiry  into  it,  by  way  of  compar- 
ison of  somewhat  with  it,  peradventure  truer,  that  so  the  defor- 
mity of  their  own  miglit  not  appear."* 

"The  schismatic,"  says  Cyprian,^  "can  have  no  longer  God 
for  his  father,  who  has  not  the  church  for  his  mother,  but  is  out 
of  the  number  of  the  faithful ;  and  though  he  should  die  for  the 
faith,  yet  should  he  never  be  saved." 

So,  also,  Irenaeus''  teaches  that  schism  "  is  such  a  rending  and 
dividing  of  the  great  and  glorious  body  of  Christ  as  equals  the 
guilt  of  schismatics  to  that  of  apostates  from  the  faith,  who  crucify 
to  themselves  afresh  the  Lord  of  glory,  and  put  him  to  an  open 
shame."* 

Nor  have  modern  prelatists  been  behindhand  in  holding  forth, 
to  the  terror  of  all  uninformed  consciences,  the  most  frightful 
representations  upon  this  subject. 

Schism  is  thus  defined,  by  Dodwell:^  "  It  will  follow,  that 
disunion  from  the  bishop  was  a   disunion   from  Christ  and  the 

1)  Tract  of  Schism,  1642,  in  hen.  been  sometimes  himself  abused  by  this 
p.  lOS.  This  rare  tract  has  recently  fallacy,  and  known  many  other  poor 
been  republished  among  the  "  Tracts  souls  seduced  by  it,  not  only  from 
for  the  People."  their  own  church  and  religion,  but  to 

2)  The  flippancy  with  which  this  popery  by  it." 

term  has  been  bandied  about  by  arro-  3)  De  Unit,  in  Slater's  Original 

gant  ecclesiastics,  in  all  ages,  is  illus-  Draught,  &c.  p.  355,  Lond.  1717,  2d 

trated    by    the    fact    that    Firmilian,  ed.,  and  in  Schism,  p.  241,  &c. 
bishop   of  Cappadocia,    (A.  D.   255,)  4)  Ibid,  Iren.  1.  iv.  cap.  53  and 

speaks   of   Stephen   of  Rome    as    a  62,  in  ibid.     See  also  Adv.  Haer.  iii. 

schismatic,  and  as  having  withdrawn  24,  p.  223.      See   also   Augustine  in 

from  the  unity  of  the  church,  because  Palmer  on  the  Ch.  vol.  i.  p.  54. 
he  allowed   llie   validity  of  heretical  5)  See,   on   these    views   of  the 

baptism;  while  Stephen,  in  returning  Fathers,  Owen's  Works,  vol.  xix.  p. 

the    compliment,   branded    his    oppo-  111,  &c. 

nents  as  perverters  of  the  truth  and  6)  See  in  Oxford  Tracts,  vol.  iii. 

traitors  to  ecclesiastical  unity.     Chil-  p.  159. 
lingworth  acknowledges  that  "  he  had 


LECT.  XVII.]  SCHISM    AS    DESCRIBED    BY    PRELATISTS.  415 

Father,  and  from  all  the  invisible,  heavenly  priesthood,  and  sac- 
rifice and  intercession.  It  will  follow,  that  disunion  from  any- 
one ordinary,  must  consequently  be  a  disunion  from  the  whole 
catholic  church  ;  seeing  it  is  impossible  for  any  to  continue  a 
member  of  Christ's  mystical  body,  who  is  disunited  from  the 
mystical  head  of  it.  It  will  follow,  that  visible  disunion  from 
the  external  sacraments  of  the  bishop,  is  in  the  consequence  a 
disunion  from  the  bishop,  and  from  the  whole  catholic  church 
in  communion  with  him,  who  ought  to  ratify  each  other's  cen- 
sures under  pain  of  schism  if  they  do  not." 

Bishop  Beveridge  thus  speaks:^  "As  for  schism,  they  cer- 
tainly hazard  their  salvation  at  a  strange  rate,  who  separate 
themselves  from  such  a  church  as  ours  is,  wherein  the  apostol- 
ical succession,  the  root  of  all  christian  communion,  hath  been 
so  entirely  preserved,  and  the  word  and  sacraments  are  so  eflec- 
tually  administered ;  and  all  to  go  into  such  assemblies  and 
meetings,  as  can  have  no  pretence  to  the  great  promise  in  my 
text." 

"  It  is  but  a  small  part,"  says  Dr.  Hammond,  "  of  the  char- 
acter of  schism,  that  it  is  contrary  to  faith,  contrary  to  charity, 
and  to  all  the  advantages  which  belong  to  a  member  of  the 
church  —  the  benefits  of  prayer  and  sacraments;  that  it  is  as 
bad  as  heresy,  and  that  there  never  was  any  heresy  in  the  church 
which  was  not  founded  in  it ;  and  that  it  is  constantly  forced,  in 
its  own  defence,  to  conclude  in  some  heresy  or  other:  each  of 
these  particulars,  and  all  of  them  taken  together,  are  but  a  small 
part  of  the  character  which  the  ancient  fathers  of  the  church 
give  us  of  the  sin  of  schism. "2 

The  reader  may  see  similar  exhibitions  of  the  character  of 
schism,  by  Archbishop  Sharp  and  several  others,  as  given  in 
Daubeny's  Guide  to  the  Church. ^ 

So  also  the  famous  Mr.  Scott,  in  his  Christian  Life  -.^  "  Yet  it 
is  a  plain  case,  that  if  it  rejects  episcopacy  and  separates  from 
the  communion  of  it,  it  thereby  wholly  divides  itself  from  the 
catholic  church." 

"  If  all  this,"  says  Mr.  Leslie,  in  concluding  his  arguments 
for  episcopacy ,4  "  if  all  this  make  but  a  doubt  (it  is  strange  that 
it  should,  at  least  that  it  should  not)  in  the  mind  of  any  consid- 
ering persons  ;  then  can  they  not  with  security  communicate 
with  any  of  our  dissenters,  because,  if  he  that  eateth  and  doubt- 
eth  is  damned,  (Rom.  xiv,  13,)  much  more  he  that  shall  do  so 

1)  Oxf.  Tr.  vol.  iii.  p.  151.  4)  Letter  on,  in  Scholar  Armed, 

2)  Vol.  i.  p.  60,  62.  vol.  i.  p.  86. 

3)  Pt.  ii.  ch.  vii.  p.  153. 


416  SCHISM    AS    DESCRIBED    BY    PRELA.TISTS.  [lECT.  XVII. 

in  religious   matters,  wherein  chiefly  this  rule  must  stand,  that 
'  whatsoever  is  not  of  faith  is  sin.'  " 

"  We  hold  you  to  be  schismatics,  utterly  denying  that  you 
have  either  ministry  or  ordinances.'"  "  The  ordinances  of  the 
gospel  administered  by  unauthorized  men,  are  in  themselves 
void,  and  no  divine  promise  is  annexed  to  their  reception.'"^ 

"  We  not  only  consider  them,"  (i.  e.  the  methodists,)  says 
Dr.  Bowden,  "  as  non-episcopal,  but  also  as  the  most  wan- 
ton schismatics  that  have  ever  disgraced  the  christian 
church."^ 

"  To  separate  one's  self,"  says  the  Rev.  Mr.  Pratt,''  "  from 
that  society  which  is  the  body  of  Christ,  and  which  continues 
steadfastly  in  the  apostles'  doctrine  and  fellowship,  betrays  a 
spirit  which  the  faithful  christian  shudders  to  contemplate ;  and 
on  which,  even  they  who  have  yielded  obedience  to  it,  will 
scarcely  dare  to  look.  It  is  the  spirit  of  pride,  and  discord,  and 
rebellion:  even  the  self-same  spirit  that  appeared  in  the  arch- 
apostate,  and  gave  origin  to  dissension  and  division  in  the  king- 
dom of  God  :  the  self-same  spirit  of  emulation  and  strife  and 
division  which  the  apostle  declares  to  be  the  mark  of  the  carnal 
mind  :  the  self-same  spirit  which  gave  rise  to  heresies  and  kin- 
dled the  fires  of  persecution  in  former  ages;  and  which  still  so 
wofully  distracts  the  kingdom  of  peace  here  upon  earth." 

Bishop  Skinner,^  in  his  Vindication,  says  :  "  The  dangerous 
and  deadly  thing  called  schism  is  a  cutting  off,  or  separating, 
from  that  ecclesiastical  body,  of  which  Christ  is  the  head,  and 
therefore  incurs  a  deprivation  of  that  nourishment  and  strength, 
which  he  affords  to  all  his  faithful  members." 

According  to  Saravia,  they  "  are  not  true  and  lawful  minis- 
ters," who  "are  not  made  ministers  of  the  church  by  their 
bishop,  nor  by  his   dimissories,  nor  by  any  other,  according  to 

1)  Dr.  Hows  Vind.  of  Prot.  Ep.  "The  common  outcry,"  says  Mat- 
Ch.  ]N.  York,  1816,  p.  30.  thew  Henry,  (Of  Schism, Lond.  1717, 

2)  Ibid,  p.  75.  p.  29,)  "  is,  that  it  is  the  setting  up  of 

3)  Works  on  Episco.  vol.  i.  p.  220.  altar  against  altar,  which  is  not  so,  for 
See  ScAisw  also  used  in  reference  to  all  at  the  most  it  is  but  altar  by  altar  ; 
the  reformed  churches,  by  the  Rev.  T.  and  though  I  have  often  read  of  one 
Hartwell  Home,  in  his  Discourse  on  body,  and  one  spirit,  and  one  hope, 
"The  Conformity  of  the  Church  of  and  one  Lord,  and  one  faith,  and  one 
England  to  apostolic  precept  and  pat-  baptism,  and  one  God  and  Father, 
tern."  Lond.  1834,  p.  28.  yet  I  could  never  find  a  word  in  all 

"  Heresy  and  schism  have  their  the  New  Testament  of  one  altar,  ex- 
day.  Nothing  is  permanent  but  truth.  cept  Jesus  Christ,— the  altar  that 
Nothing  will  endure  to  tlie  end  of  the  sanctifies  every  gift,  in  whom  we  all 
world  but  the  apostolic  church."     Dr.  centre." 

How's  Vind.  of  the  Prot.  Ep.  Ch.  pp.  4)  Old  Paths,  p.  91 ;  and  see  also 

29,  30.     See  also  how  schism  is  de-  pp.  94,  96. 
scribed  by  Bishop  Home  in  the  Schol-  5)  P.  440. 

ar  Armed,  vol.  ii.  p.  275. 


LECT.  XVI.]        THE   ANGLICAN   CHURCH   SCHISMATICAL.  417 

the  order  of  the  English  church."  Those  who  have  not,  in 
any  diocese,  where  there  is  a  bishop,  taken  such  institution  and 
induction,  "are  come  in  by  intrusion  and  usurpation  of  cure  of 
souls,"  and  "  by  the  ecclesiastical  laws  they  are  excommuni- 
cants  and  schismatics."' 

"  We  may,  therefore,  conclude,"  says  Mr.  Palmer,*  "  that 
voluntary  separation  from  the  church  of  Christ  is  a  sin  against 
our  brethren,  against  ourselves,  against  God  ;  a  sin  which,  unless 
repented  of,  is  eternally  destructive  to  the  soul.  The  heinous 
nature  of  this  offence  is  incapable  of  exaggeration,  because  no 
human  imagination,  and  no  human  tongue,  can  adequately  de- 
scribe its  enormity. "3 

It  is  very  unfortunate  for  these  prelatic  judges,  that  in  thus 
anathematizing  and  cutting  off  from  Christ,  all  non-prelatic  com- 
munions, they  could  not  agree  in  their  fulminating  decrees.  As 
it  is,  by  their  evident  contrariety,  they  have  turned  against  each 
other,  those  weapons  by  which  it  was  designed  to  carry  destruc- 
tion to  the  ranks  of  their  opponents,  and  are  thus,  by  a  just 
judgment  of  Heaven,  made  to  overthrow  themselves. 

The  Church  of  England  lies  under  this  imputation  as  much 
as  we  do.  Thus  the  Romish  divine,  who  answered  Dr.  Sher- 
lock, speaks  of  "  Lutheranism,  or  Cranmerism,"  and  "  the  pal- 
pableness  of  their  schism."'' 

Thus  also  Bishop  Van  Mildert  affirms,  in  his  Boyle  Lectures: 
"  The  Romish  writers,  indeed,  charge  them,  not  only  with  her- 
esy and  schism,  but  with  other  errors  of  the  most  abominable 
kind." 

Certain  it  is,  that  in  1554,  the  two  houses  of  parliament  did 

1)  Saravia's  Priesthood,  ed.  Oxf.  who,  in  the  polished  phraseology  of 
1840,  pp.  20,  21.  the    day,   were  denominated  '  dissen- 

2)  On  the  Ch.  vol.  i.  p.  54.  ters  .-' '      What  could    they   possibly 

3)  Bishop  Beveridge  most  un-  urge  in  extenuation  of  their  conduct? 
equivocally  identifies  separation  from  He  might  be  told  by  some,  they  were 
the  Church  cf  England  with  e.\clu-  hereditary  dissenters,  or  dissenters  be- 
sion  from  the  catholic  church."  Wks.  cause  their  fathers  dissented.  But 
vol.  ii.  pp.  lOG,  147, 148, 165,  and  217.  would  that  at  the  last  day  be  received 

"  A    correspondent   of   the    Globe,  as   an  excuse  for  their  sin  ?     Would 

who  attended    divine   service   at   St.  the  plea  of  the  adulterer  excuse   him 

Margaret's  Church,  Westminster,  on  that  lie  had  committed  that  crime  be- 

Sunday  week,  gives  an  extract  of  the  cause   his  father  had  done  so  before  ? 

sermon.        The    preacher    said,    the  or  of  the  murderer,  because  his  father 

Church   of  England    derived   its    au-  had  committed    murder .''     He  feared 

thority  lineally  and  directly  from  the  (!  !  !)  very  much  that   the  schismatic 

apostles,  and  as  such  administered  its  dissenter  would  share  in  the  same  just 

sacraments,  and  therefore  any  depart-  punishment   that  would    be  awarded 

ure,  any  separation  from  it,  was  schis-  against    the  murderer  and  the  adul- 

matic.      He    then    demanded,    what  terer." 

must  be  the  ultimate  doom  of  all  those  4)  Notes  of  the  Ch.  p.  57. 

persons  —  schismatics,     certainly,  —  5)  Boyle  Lect.  vol.  i.  p.  28G. 

53 


418  THE    ROMISH   CHURCH    SCHISMATICAL.  [lECT.  XVI. 

publicly  declare  that  the  nation  "  had  been  guilty  of  a  most  hor- 
rible defection  and  schism  from  the  apostolic  see.'" 

The  grounds  of  the  Roman  catholic  objections  to  the  minis- 
terial orders  of  the  Church  of  England,  are  given  by  Dr.  Milner 
in  his  End  of  Controversy.^  He  charges  it  with  "  having 
renounced  Christ's  commission  given  to  his  apostles." 
'•'  Hence  it  clearly  appears  that  there  is,  and  can  be,    no 

APOSTOLICAL  SUCCESSION  OF  MINISTRY  IN  THE  ESTABLISHED 
CHURCH,  MORE  THAN  IN  ANY  OTHER  CONGREGATIONS  OR  SO- 
CIETIES OF  PROTESTANTS."  Oh,  Dr.  Miluer,  how  cruel  art 
thou  to  thy  dear  sister  England  ! 

As  the  Romish  thus  denounces  as  schismatical  the  English 
church,  so  has  the  English  ever  been  found  most  prompt  and 
ready  to  meet  all  such  demands  against  her,  by  the  most  liberal 
payment  in  kind. 

Archbishop  Bramhall,'*  as  we  learn  from  Jeremy  Taylor,  "in  a 
full  discourse,  proves  the  church  of  Rome,  not  only  to  be  guilty  of 
schism,  by  making  it  necessary  to  depart  from  them  ;  but  they  did 
actuate  the  schisms,  and  themselves  made  the  first  separation  in 
the  great  point  of  the  pope's  supremacy,  which  was  the  palladium 
for  which  they  principally  contended.  He  made  it  appear  that 
the  popes  of  Rome  were  usurpers  of  the  rights  of  kings  and 
bishops ;  that  they  brought  in  new  doctrines  in  every  age ;  that  they 
imposed  their  own  devices  upon  Christendom  as  articles  of  faith  ; 
that  they  prevaricated  the  doctrines  of  the  apostles  ;  that  the 
Church  of  England  only  returned  to  her  primitive  purity  ;  that 
she  joined  with  Christ  and  his  apostles  ;  that  she  agreed  in  all 
the   sentiments  of  the  primitive  church." 

Leslie,  in  his  Letter  on  Episcopacy,  in  defence  of  the  English 
church,  thus  speaks  of  the  Romish  church  : 

"  By  setting  up  the  claim  of  universality,  the  church  of 
Rome  has  thereby  commenced  that  grand  schism  against  all  the 
bishops  of  the  earth  .  .  .  but  while  he  would  thrust  other  churches 
from  him,  he  thrusts  himself  from  the  Catholic  church."'' 

1)  Bnrnet's  Ref.  vol.  ii.  p.  454  ;  See  also  Origin  of  the  Prayer  Book, 
Fox,  vol.  iii.  p  no  ;  Price's  Prot.  Non-      pp.  72,  78,  148,  150. 

conf.  vol.  i.  p.  105.  See  Bishop  Doane's  Further  Post- 
That   the  Romish  church  charges  script  to  his  Brief  Examination,  Bur- 
schism  on  the  English  church,  see  de-  lington,  1841. 

clared  in  Oxf.  Tracts,  vol.  iii.  p.  142;  See  this  charge  also  fully  establish- 

Burnet,  Hist,  of  the  Ref.  reply  to  San-  cd  against  the  Romish  Ch.  in  Palmer 

ders'    Work;   Faber's  Albigenses,   p.  on  the  Ch.  vol.  i.  p.  454,  &c.Fpp.  465, 

14  ;  Palmer,  vol.  ii.  p.  450,  &c.;  Neal's  469,  472,  47S,  and  in  Perceval's  Rom. 

Puritans,  vol.  iv.  p.  178.  Schism. 

See  Palmer,  vol.  ii.  p.  538,  by  Rom.  That  the  Roman  catholic   church, 

2)  Letter  xxix.  in  these  United  States,  is  schismatic, 

3)  See  Works,  vol.  vi.  p.  439.  is  proved  by  Mr.  Odenheimer,  in  his 

4)  Leslie's  Letter  on  Episcopacy,  Origin  of  the  Prayer  Book.  Pliilad. 
in  Scholar  Armed,  vol.  i.  p.  56.  1841,  pp.  81, 106,  and  Note  M.  p.  148 ; 


LECT.  XVI.] 


THE    ROMANISTS    SCHISMATICAL. 


419 


"  And  herein  of  all  others"  says  Archbishop  Uslier,!  "  do  our 
Romanists  most  fearfully  offend ;  as  being  the  authors  of  the 


and  also  by  Mr.  Coleman  in  his  edition 
of  Faber  on  Romanism. 

See  also  "  The  charge  of  Novelty, 
Heresy  and  Schism  against  the  Ch.  of 
Rome  substantiated,"  by  the  Rev. 
1'homas  Lathbury,  in  his  "  State  of 
Popery  and  Jesuitism  in  England." 
Lond.  12mo. 

"  Episcopacy  vs.  Papacy.  —  A  dis- 
pute has  for  some  time  been  going  on, 
(says  the  Boston  Ciirislian  Watch- 
man, for  Jan.  15,  1841,)  between  the 
learned  doctors  of  the  church  of  Rome 
and  of  the  English  Episcopal  Church, 
respecting  the  apostolical  jurisdiction 
and  succession  of  the  episcopacy  in 
the  British  churches.  A  distinguished 
writer  of  the  church  of  Rome  has 
lately  undertaken  to  show  that  the 
ordinations  of  the  Church  of  England 
are  not  valid.  Dr.  Wiseman,  on  the 
other  hand,  a  distinguished  scholar  of 
the  Romish  church,  in  some  stric- 
tures on  the  Oxford  Tracts,  has  imder- 
taken  to  show  that,  admitting  the  va- 
lidity of  the  ordinations  of  the  Church 
of  England,  her  bishops  have  still  no 
just  claim  to  apostolic  jurisdiction, 
and  that  the  obligation  still  lies  on  the 
laity  to  be  in  communion  with  the 
Roman  and  not  the  English  hier- 
archy. 

'•  These  strictures  have  lately  been 
replied  to  by  Rev.  Mr.  Palmer,  of  Ox- 
ford College,  in  which  he  attempts  to 
show  them  on  their  own  premises, '  that 
their  hierarchy  [in  England  and  by 
consequence  in  this  country,]  is  alto- 
gether destitute  of  apostolical  succes- 
sion and  jurisdiction;  that  the  works 
of  their  ministry  are  altogether  un- 
profitable ;  that  all  who  communicate 
with  them  are  involved  in  schism  ;  and 
that  the  lawful  and  apostolical  adminis- 
tration of  the  sacraments,  and  of  all  oth- 
er parts  of  the  sacred  ministry,  can  only 
be  found  amongst  the  legitimate  and 
catholic  hierarchy  of  these  realms  ; 
the  only  representatives  and  spiritual 
descendants  of  that  episcopacy  which 
has  flourished  among  us  for  seventeen 
centuries;  the  only  successors  of  An- 
selm  and  Grosteste,  of  Edmund  and 
Theodore,  of  Patrick  and  Augustine, 
and  of  the  Holy  Apostles.' 

'•  Such  are  the  worldly  and  un- 
profitable disputes  in  which  men  spend 
their  lives,  who  profess  to  be  the  only 
successors  and  representatives  of  the 
apostles    of   Christ !      We    devoutly 


thank  the  gracious  Head  of  the  Church 
that  the  plea  about  apostolical  succes- 
sion is  utterly  disregarded  as  a  figment 
and  fable  of  popery  by  all  denomina- 
tions in  this  country,  except  the  Rom- 
ish priests  and  a  few  high-church 
episcopalians.  Among  us,  those  and 
those  only  are  acknowledged  as  suc- 
cessors of  Christ  and  the  apostles, 
who  manifest  their  spirit." 

"  On  supposition  that  the  church  of 
Rome  is  a  church  of  Christ,"  says  Dr. 
Owen,  fWks.  vol.  xix.  pp.  139,  140,) 
"  it  will  appear  to  be  the  most  schis- 
matical  church  in  the  world.  I  say 
on  supposition  that  it  is  a  church,  and 
that  there  is  such  a  thing  as  a  schis- 
matical  church,  (as,  perhaps,  a  church 
may,  froin  its  intestine  differences,  be 
so  not  unfitly  denominated,)  that  is 
the  state  and  condition  thereof.  The 
pope  is  the  head  of  their  church,  seve- 
ral nations  of  Europe  are  members  of 
it.  Have  we  not  seen  that  head  tak- 
ing his  flesh  in  his  teeth,  tearing  his 
body  and  his  limbs  to  pieces  .'  Plave 
some  of  them  thought  on  any  thing 
else  but '  Arise,  Peter,  kill  and  eat,'  all 
their  days .''  Have  we  not  seen  this 
goodly  head  in  disputes  about  Peter's 
patrimony,  and  his  own  jurisdiction, 
wage  war,  fight  and  shed  blood, —  the 
blood  of  his  own  members  ?  Must 
we  believe  armies  raised,  and  battles 
fought,  towns  fired,  all  in  pure  love, 
and  perfect  church  order  ?  not  to  men- 
tion their  old  '  ultare  contra  altare,' 
anti-popes,  anti-councils.  Look  all 
over  their  church,  on  their  potentates, 
bishops,  friars,  there  is  no  end  of  their 
variances.  What  do  the  chiefest, 
choicest  pillars,  eldest  sons,  and  I 
know  not  what,  of  iheir  church,  at 
this  day  ?  Do  they  not  kill,  destroy 
and  ruin  each  other,  as  they  are  able  .-' 
Let  them  not  say  these  are  the  divis- 
ions of  the  nations  that  are  in  their 
church,  not  of  the  church  ;  for  all 
these  nations,  on  their  hypothesis,  are 
members  of  that  one  church.  And 
that  church,  which  hath  no  means  to 
prevent  its  members  from  designed, 
resolved  on  and  continued  murdering 
one  of  another,  nor  can  remove  them 
from  its  society,  shall  never  have  me 
in  its  communion,  as  being  bloodily 
schisinatical." 

1)  Sermonbef  the  King,  in  Juno, 
1624,  Lond.  1CS7,  4to.  4thed.  p.  7. 


420  THE   ROMISH    CHURCH   SCHISMATICAL.  [lECT.  XVI. 

most  cruel  schism,  that  ever  hath  been  seen  in  the  church  of 
God.  Those  infamous  schisms  of  the  Novatians  and  Donatists 
were  but  petty  rents,  in  comparison  of  this  huge  rupture,  which 
hath  pulled  asunder  east  and  west,  north  and  south  ;  and  grown  to 
such  a  head  at  home,  that  in  our  western  parts  (where  this 
faction  was  so  prevalent)  it  hath  for  divers  ages  past  been 
esteemed  catholic.  In  the  17th  of  the  Revelation  we  have  a 
woman  described  unto  us,  sitting  upon  seven  mountains,  and 
upon  many  waters.  The  woman  is  there  expounded  to  be  that 
great  city  which  reigneth  over  the  kings  of  the  earth.  The 
seven  mountains  upon  which  that  city  sat,  needed  not  to  be 
expounded :  every  child  knew  what  was  meant  thereby.  The 
waters  are  interpreted  peoples,  and  multitudes,  and  nations,  and 
tongues  ;  which  is  that  very  universality  and  Catholicism,  that 
the  Romanists  are  wont  so  much  to  brag  of.  For,  this  woman 
is  the  particular  church  of  Rome,  the  city-church ;  which  they 
call  the  mother-church,  the  Holy  Ghost  styleth  the  mother  of 
harlots,  and  abominations  of  the  earth.  Those  peoples,  and 
multitudes,  and  nations,  and  tongues,  are  such  as  this  proud  city 
reigneth  over :  the  catholic  Roman  church,  they  are  commonly 
called  by  themselves ;  but  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  beast  upon 
which  the  woman  sitteth." 

"  This  woman  is  the  head  of  the  faction,  and  the  very  mother 
of  this  schism,  the  beast,  that  is  to  say,  they  that  suffer  them- 
selves to  be  thus  ridden  by  her,  are  her  abettors  and  supporters 
in  it." 

This  is  not  all.  This  exterminating  fire  is  not  only  directed 
by  the  Roman  and  the  Anglican  prelacy  against  each  other  ;*  it 
is  also  kept  up  by  one  portion  of  the  English  army  against  the 
opposite  ;  as  it  is  also  by  the  different  companies  which,  in  multi- 

1)  It  is  somewhat  amusing  to  see  have  above  essayed  to  describe;  and 
with  what  pertinacity  our  Roman  a  curious  sort  of  thing  it  is,  and 
catholic  neighbors  reject  all  commu-  we  are  invited  to  allow  ourselves  to 
*ion  with  their  Anglican  brethren,  be  gulled  into  the  medley.  This  really 
in  the  title  of  catholic.  "  We  are  is  quite  condescending  in  our  breth- 
proud,"  says  the  Roman  Catholic  ren,  who,  feeling  some  little  qualms 
Miscellany  of  Charleston,  (for  March  as  to  the  vahdity  of  their  title,  prefer 
G,  1841,  art.  Catholic,)  "  of  being  Ro-  being  admitted  as  tenants  in  common 
man  catholics,  and  we  say  that  there  with  us,  to  denying  that  we  have  any 
is  no  claim  to  catholic  where  there  is  right,  but  asserting  that  the  whole 
a  separation  from  Rome."  "Itisdis-  estate  rests  in  themselves."  "We 
courteous  to  attempt  to  give  it,"  i.  e.  cannot  but  feel  grateful  for  the  gene- 
catholic,  "  to  our  opponents."  "Il,"  rosity  of  the  writers.  But  we  will 
the  Romish  church,  "  had  been,  time  none  of  it.  If  we  can  have  no  bet- 
out  of  mind,  in  possession  of  the  title  ter  claim  than  this  to  the  name,  we 
catholic.  We  care  not  why  it  was  are  done  with  it." 
given  ;  the  possession,  and  the  ex-  Poor  prelatists  !  we  are  heartily  sor- 
clusive  possession,  were  notorious."  ry  for  you.  To  have  deserted  your 
"  But  now  it  seems  there  is  to  be  one  willing  friends,  and  to  have  your  ad- 
holy  catholic  and  apostolic  church  vances  rejected  in  such  scorn  as  this, 
formed  into  such  a  patch  work  as  we  is  hard  indeed  ! 


LECT.  XVI.]       THE    ANGLICAN    PARTIES    ALL    SCIIISMATICAL.  421 

form  variety  compose  the  Roman  host.  The  non-juring  clergy- 
men at  the  revolution  raised  this  same  clamor  against  the  Church 
of  England,'  as  having  separated  from  the  catholic  apostolic 
church,  and  as  having,  therefore,  no  authentic  ministry  ;  while, 
on  the  other  hand,  this  more  liberal  branch  of  the  English  church 
maintained  towards  their  non-juring  brethren,  a  front  of  most  de- 
termined hauteur  and  cold  neglect. 

"  Sancroft  and  others  were  still  considered  by  their  advocates 
as  bishops  of  their  respective  sees,  and  Tillotson  and  his  asso- 
ciates reprobated  by  them  as  schismatics." 

The  non-jurors  and  high-churchmen  usurped  to  themselves 
exclusively,  the  honorable  title  of  Church  of  England  men. 2 

The  two  "  Defences  of  the  Deprived  Bishops,  (the  non-jurors)^ 
which  contain  the  reasons  of  their  separating,  and  which  they  are 
not  a  little  proud  of,  upon  all  occasions  referring  to  them,  make 
the  present  Church  of  England  guilty  of  the  greatest  heresy,  as 
striking  at  what  is  fundamental  in  the  highest  degree,  as  being 
fundamental  to  other  fundamentals,  the  succession  of  bishops, 
without  which  the  church  cannot  subsist.  And  on  this  head 
tragical  declamations  are  made  of  the  great  danger  the  church  is 
in  ;  for  which  there  could  not  be  the  least  ground,  were  the  pres- 
ent possessors  of  the  sees  supposed  to  be  true  bishops,  and  con- 
sequently capable  of  continuing  the  succession.  So  that  should 
the  deprived  bishops  die  without  consecrating  others,  the  non- 
jurors would,  by  these  principles,  be  as  far  from  owning  the  pres- 
ent church  as  state." 

So  speaks  that  very  able  and  learned  work,  "  The  Rights  of 
the  Christian  Church  Asserted, "<  which  was  written  "  to  justify 
the  established  church,  and  to  confute  those  notions  by  which 
such  as  call  themselves  the  true  Church  of  England,  attempt  to 
prove  the  present  church  guilty  of  schism."* 

"  These  great  apostles  of  unity,"  says  Dr.  Mitchell,®  "  who 
for  a  hundred  and  sixteen  years  have  been  deafening  us  with  the 
'  unceasing  cry,'  schism,  schism,  join  us,  '  or  be  ruined  for 
ever,'  have  themselves  gone  over  to  one  part  of  the  schismatics  ; 
and  so  here  is  one  rent  sewed  up." 

Nor  is  there  any  abatement  of  that  loving  concord  with  which 
different  portions  of  this  church  have  thus  regarded  each  other. 
On  the  contrary,  it  is  found  at  present  to  actuate  the  bosoms  of 
the  Oxford  sect,  or  the  high-church  prelatists,  and  those  who 
differ  from  them,  with  all  the  strength  of  a  burning  passion. 

1)  Bishop  White,  in  the  Case  of  3)  Rights  of  the  Christian  Ch. 
the  Episcopal  Churches,  1782,  p.  10.  p.  329. 

2)  See  "The  True  Character  of  4)  See  ed.  3d,  Lond.  1717,  p.416. 
a  Churchman,  showing  the  false  pre-  5)  See  preface,  p.  58. 

tences  to  that  name,"  in  Scott'a  Col-  G)  Presb.  Letters,  p.  349. 

lection  of  Tracts,  vol.  ix.  p.  477. 


422  THE  OXFORD  DIVINES  AND  SECT  SCHISMATICS.       [lECT.  XVI. 

The  upholders  of  this  prelatic  system  are  denominated  by  the 
London  Christian  Observer  "  the  sect  of  the  tractitians  "  —  "  the 
Laudean  school  "  —  "  so  baleful  to  the  church  of  Christ  and  to 
the  souls  of  men.'"  They  are  denied  to  be,  in  truth,  members 
of  the  Anglican  church.  Of  Mr.  Newman  and  Dr.  Pusey  it 
is  said  :  "  We  ask  Professor  Pusey  how,  as  a  conscientious  man, 
he  retains  any  office  in  a  church  which  requires  him  to  subscribe 
to  all  the  Tliirty-Nine  Articles,  and  to  acknowledge  as  scriptu- 
ral the  doctrines  set  forth  in  the  Homilies?  Will  any  one  of 
the  writers,  or  approvers  of  the  Oxford  tracts,  venture  to  say 
that  he  does  not  really  believe  all  the  doctrines  of  the  Articles 
and  Homilies  of  our  church  ?  "^ 

"  The  chief  schism,"  says  a  correspondent  of  the  London 
Christian  Observer,^  "  which  is  now  rending  our  own  church, 
arises  from  the  efforts  of  some  who  are  going  '  beyond  the  exact 
prescriptions  (or  even  the  intimations)  of  divine  truth,'  very 
much  after  the  fashion  of  Luther  himself  respecting  consub- 
stantiation ;  but  the  remark  applies  generally ;  for  there  is  a 
strong  tendency  both  in  individuals  and  churches  to  set  up 
unprescribed  'terms  of  communion;'  just  as  some  among  us 
are  ejecting  the  foreign  protestant  churches,  even  the  Lutheran 
itself,  from  covenanted  mercy,  by  reason  of  their  alleged  loss  of 
apostolical  succession." 

1)  See  for   Jan.   1841,  p.  10,  et      19,)   and   "the    high-church    party." 
passim.  Ibid,  p.  5. 

2)  See  ibid,  for  1836,  p.  791.  On  the  tendency  of  this  system  to 

3)  Feb.  1841,  p.  93.  socinianism,  see  Bishop  Mcllvaine's 
"The     Tractarian     Sect,"     Lond.      Oxford  Divinity,  pp.  85,  208,  239. 

Chr.  Obs.  March,  1841,  p.  160.     The  That  they  contradict  the  standard 

Lond.   Chr.  Obs.   (for   1837,  p.  840,)  of  the  English  church,  is  also  clearly 

speaks  of  these  divines  as  "  the  Ox-  shown.  See  pp.  222,  230. 

ford  schismatists,"   and   for  the  very  He  calls    on  these  divines  to  "  go 

reason    of    their    exclusiveness,    «S:.c.  and  learn  the  alphabet  of  the  gospel ! 

See  pp.  172,  and  550.  Spell  the  name  of  Jesus  !  "    (p.  S^47.) 

A  writer  in  the  Episcopal  Recorder  "  Oh,  calumniated  churches  !  that  one 

thus  speaks  of  Dr.  Pusey,  (quoted   in  of   thine    own    children    and    pastors 

Lond.  Chr.  Obs    Nov.  1840,  p.  679,)  should  teach  such  doctrine  for  thine  !  " 

"  With  consummate  puerility  he  con-  p.  250. 

siders    figurative    language    as   if   it  He  represents  the  doctrines  of  the 

were    literal,  and    mere    images    and  Oxford     divinity    as     fundamentally 

shadows  as  if  they  were  realities  and  different  from  those  which  he  defends, 

substantial  entities  or  beings.     With  and  involving   the  very  foundation  of 

this  explanation,  hear  him  speak  for  a  sinner's  hope  towards  God.  (p.  505.) 

himself,  pervert  scripture,  and  advo-  "  A  vital  difference  upon  grand   pri- 

cate  pernicious  heresies."  mary  questions,  involving  all  that  was 

Of  Mr.  Newman's  doctrine  on  Jus-  so  nobly  contended  for  by  the  martyrs 
tification,  the  London  Christian   Ob-  of  the  reformation,  and  all  that  is  pre- 
server affirms,  (March,  1841,  p.  170,)  cious  to  the  sinner  in  the  gospel  of 
"  it  is  a  fearful,  a  despair-engendering  Christ."     pp.  507,  508,  522,  537. 
and  a  soul-destroying  doctrine."  See  also  Note  A. 

Professor  Powell  styles  them  "  the 
traditionists,"  (Tradition  Unveiled,  p. 


LECT.  XVI.]       THE  EVANGELICAL  PARTY  ALSO  SCHISMATICS.  423 

The  London  Christian  Observer,  for  January  1839/  in  speak- 
ing of  the  Oxford  monument  to  be  erected  to  the  memory  of 
Cranmer,  Ridley,  and  Latimer,  urges  as  a  reason  for  some  mon- 
umental building,  in  preference  to  a  church,  that  the  pulpit  of 
a  church  might  be  made  to  proclaim  opinions  in  direct  contra- 
riety to  those  of  these  reformers  ;  "  especially  in  a  diocese,  the 
ecclesiastical  ruler  of  which  —  melancholy  to  relate  —  has  for 
several  years  been  countenancing  the  doctrines  and  actions  of 
the  most  insidious  and  dangerous  body  of  men  that  ever  obtruded 
itself  within  the  precincts  of  the  English  church." 

Nor  are  these  divines,  on  the  other  hand,  at  all  reluctant  in 
returning  these  complimentary  manifestations  of  the  unity  of  the 
Anglican  church.  Take  an  example  from  an  editorial  address,  in 
the  last  number  of  the  The  Church  of  England  Quarterly  Re- 
view, which  contains  the  following  passage  :* 

"  The  doctrine  that  regeneration  uniformly  takes  place  in 
baptism  is  so  clearly  taught  by  the  Church  of  England,  and 
involved  in  its  general  procedure,  that  we  hesitate  not  to  say, 
that  the  only  honorable  course,  which  can  be  pursued  by  those 
who  hold  the  contrary  opinion,  is  to  abstain  from  agitating  her 
communion  by  their  preaching,  which  they  must  do,  if  only 
commonly  honest  and  consistent,  —  and  to  cease,  also,  to  eat 
her  bread,  and  to  fill  those  pulpits  which  can  only  be  conscien- 
tiously occupied  by  her  sincere  and  cordial  members. 

"  The  doctrine  of  the  total  depravity  of  human  nature  is 
another  instance  of  the  perversion  of  scripture,  and  of  contrari- 
ety to  the  sentiments  of  the  Church  of  England,  chargeable 
upon  some  of  the  clergy  called  evangelical ;  but  it  is,  unhappily, 
too  consistent  with  the  Calvinistic  notions  of  election  and  regen- 
eration." 

Thus  quietly  are  the  the  whole  evangelical  party  discarded 
as  unsound  members  P 

Dr.  Hook  thus  speaks  of  the  evangelical  or  low-church  party 
in  the  episcopal  church  :''  "  I  am  opposed  to  the  opinions  main- 
tained by  those  who  call  themselves  low-churchmen,  on  this 
ground :  I  beheve  it  to  be  only  on  account  of  their  being  bad 
logicians,  that  they  are  not  sociniansJ' 

1)  P.  64.  5)  "  We  heed  little,"  say  the  edi- 

2)  The  Belfast  Christian  Patriot,  tors  of  the  Observer,  "  what  Dr. 
vol.  ii.  No.  95.  Hook,  —  who,  when  he  had  a  ])urpose 

3)  It  is  explicitly  declared  by  to  serve,  assailed  his  meek  and  holy 
these  Oxford  tractitians,  that  there  diocesan.  Bishop  Rider,  in  print,  in 
can  be  no  real  alteration  in  what  they  an  undutiful  and  overbearing,  not  to 
avouch  to  be  the  doctrines  of  the  say  contemptuous,  manner,  —  may 
church  without  a  schism.  (London  think  either  of  good  churchmanship 
Quart.  Rev.  Ap.  1839,  p.  313.)  or  sound  divinity  ;  but  with  regard  to 

4)  Lond.  Chr.  Obs.  1839,  p.  234.  his  assertions,  we  reply,  first,  that  we 


424  THE  EVANGELICAL  PARTY  ALSO  SCHISMATICS.       [lECT.  XVI. 

"  Those  professed  members  of  the  establishment,"  says 
Crabbe,'  "who  affect  the  title  of  evangelical,  and  wish  to  palm 
upon  the  church  the  peculiarities  of  the  calvinistic  doctrine,  and 
to  ingraft  their  own  modes  and  forms  into  its  discipline,  are 
schismatics.^'^ 

The  London  Christian  Observer  complained  of  the  Oxford 
tractators  for  applying  unseemly  names  to  dissenters.  In  vol- 
ume fourth  of  the  Tracts,^  these  writers  justify  themselves  by 
showing  that  they  applied  these  epithets  to  parties  within  the 
church  and  not  to  those  without.  "  Another  remarkable  exhi- 
bition of  the  same  science  is  your  asserting  that  one  of  the  tracts 
called  the  dissenters  '  a  mob  of  tiptops,  gapes  and  yawns,'  (pp. 
172,  174,  177,  185,  186.)  Five  times  you  say  or  imply  it. 
Now  it  so  happens  that  the  tract  in  question  has  nothing  to  do 
with  dissenters;  but  with  persons  who  wish  alterations  in  the 
liturgy  on  insufficient  grounds,  a  circumstance  which  in  itself 
excludes  dissenters." 

"  Yawn  is  a  farmer  whose  sons  go  to  the  church  school ;  and 
he  himself  '  scarcely  ever,'  as  he  boasts,  '  misses  a  Sunday,' 
coming  into  the  service  '  about  the  end  of  the  first  lesson.'  Ned 
Gape,  too,  is  a  church-goer,  though  a  late  one.  In  what  sense 
then,  Mr.  Editor,  do  you  assert  that  when  Richard  Nelson,  in 
the  end  of  the  story,  says  that  he  '  cannot  stand  by  and  see  the 
noble  old  prayer  book  pulled  to  pieces,  just  to  humor  a  mob  of 
Tiptops,  Gapes  and  Yawns,'  that  the  writer  calls  dissenters  by 
these  titles  ? " 

In  a  book  entitled  "  The  Oxford  Tracts,  the  Public  Press  and 
the  Evangelical  Party,"  by  G.  Percival,  it  is  said  :  "  The  evan- 
gelical party  in  the  church  are  only  restrained,  from  the  acci- 
dent of  their  position,  from  the  destructive  power  of  rationahstic 
and  socinian  principles ;  the  spirit  is  already  there,  only  its  full 
developement  is  restrained" 

While  these  parties  in  the  English  church  thus  denounce 
each  other  ;  the  prelatical  or  high-church  party,  as  certainly 
cut  themselves  off  from  the  communion  of  all  other  churches 
on  earth.  For,  from  the  Roman  catholic  church  they  are  most 
peremptorily  —  in  common  with  all  other  sects  —  excommunica- 
ted. So  also  are  they  regarded  by  the  Greek  and  other  Ori- 
ental churches,  as  a  schismatical,  and  withered  branch  of  the 

know  not  of  any  body  of  persons  who  Anglican  communion  ;  and,  secondly, 

call  themselves  by  the  nickname  of  that   his   accusation   falls    upon    the 

'low-churchmen,'   though    we    do  of  Church  of  England." 
some  who  mounted  on  Romanist  stilts,  1)  English  Synonymes,  p.  480. 

are  pleased  so  to  denominate  all  true  2)  Eng.  ed.  Pref.  p.  31. 

reformation-principle  members  of  the 


LECT.  XVII.]       THE    PRELATIC    CHURCH    SELF-CONDEMNED.  425 

true  church.  Nor  are  they  satisfied  with  tliis  exclusion  from 
the  greatest  portion  of  the  church  cathohc.  They  voluntarily 
pronounce  a  sentence  of  excision  upon  themselves,  from  nine 
tenths  of  the  protestant  world  ;  and  thus  with  infatuated  folly, 
while  making  pretensions  to  be  the  only  and  true  catholic 
CHUKCH,  reduce  that  universal  church  to  the  liniiis  and  dimen- 
sions of  their  own  comparatively  feeble  denomination.' 

To  crown  this  climax,  it  will  be  our  object  to  show,  before 
closing  this  discussion,  that  prelatists,  both  of  the  Roman  and 
the  Anglican  school,  have  been,  and  are  still,  justly  charged 
with  schism,  by  all  non-prelatical  churches;  —  not  for  the  same 
reason  indeed,  but  upon  the  ground  of  their  unchristian  preten- 
sions, and  that  intolerant  and  anathematizing  conduct,  by  which 
they  attempt  to  establish  a  supremacy  over  the  church  of  God. 

Most  certain  it  is,  from  this  review,  that  the  definition  ordina- 
rily given  of  schism,  needs  to  be  itself  defined,  since  its  au- 
thors apply  it  most  appropriately,  as  they  think,  to  things  which, 
by  all  ordinary  rules  of  judgment,  would  appear  to  be  opposites. 
In  order  therefore  to  see  our  way  clear  through  this  mist,  and  to 
escape  from  this  sinking  bog,  into  which  we  have  been  plunged, 
by  attempting  to  trace  out  the  course  of  our  prelatical  legisla- 
tors, we  must  endeavor  to  ascertain  what,  after  all,  is  to  be  un- 
derstood by  schism.  And,  as  it  is  on  all  hands  acknowledged 
to  be  a  violation  of  that  unity  which  is  characteristic  of  the 
christian  church,  — and  its  opposite  ;  by  understanding  in  what 
this  unity  consists,  we  shall  at  once  arrive  at  a  true  knowledge 
of  the  nature  of  schism. 

Though  on  this  subject  we  shall  again  speak,  it  will  be  neces- 

1)  "  These  remarks  are  meant  to  Christ   throughout  the  world.      The 

apply,  not  to  the  Church  of  England,  first  is,  that  there  cannot  be  a  church, 

but  to  a  party  —  we  are  sorry  to  say,  nor  any  scriptural  sacraments,  unless 

the  dominant  party  —  in  that  church.  holy  orders   have  descended   through 

A  party,  whose   doings  implicate  her  an  uninterrupted  line  of  bishops  from 

character,  if  they  do  not  involve  her  the  days  of  the  apostles.     This  prin- 

destiny.  ciple  excludes  the  continental  church- 

"  There  are   three  Church  of  Eng-  es,  the  church  of  Scotland,  the  British 

land  Reviews  at  the  present  time  ; —  and  Irish  dissenters,  as  well  as  all  the 

one  of  them  is  Pustyite,  another  serai-  American  churches,  except  the  epis- 

Puscyite,  but  all  anti-evangelical.    The  copalians  and  Moravians.     But  even 

fountains  of  theological  literature,  the  these    are    excluded    by   the    second 

episcopal   bench,  and   a  vast  majority  princi[)le,  which  makes  the  validity  of 

of  the  dignified  and  beneficed  clergy,  the    clerical    functions    depend   on    a 

are  tainted  with  a  spirit  which  differs  civil  establishment  and  the  consequent 

from    popery   less    than    the    blossom  sanction  of  the  magistrate.  This  schis- 

does  from  the  seed."  matical    tendency   has    been   exhibit- 

"  They  have  withdrawn  their  coun-  ed  in  the  most  offensive  forms,  at  a  time 

tenance  from  all  dissenters,  great  and  when  all  other  churches   are   longing 

small,  and   given    prominence  to  two  and  laboring  for  union  among  them- 

great   principles,  by  which  they  have  selves."     Belfast  Chr.  Patriot. 
cut  themselves  off"  from  the  church  of 

54 


426  THE    NATURE    OF    CHRISTIAN    UNION.  [LECT.  XVII. 

sary  to  make  some  remarks.  —  Now  as  there  is  but  one  supreme 
and  spiritual  head  of  the  church,  so  is  there  but  one  universal 
body  of  which  Christ  is  thus  head  ;  and  this  body  is  composed 
of  all  who  shall  be  gathered  together  in  Him,  from  amid  the 
trackless  wastes  and  ages  of  time,  and  who,  together,  shall 
compose  the  family  in  heaven.  By  the  unity  of  the  church, 
we  understand,  therefore,  that,  as  there  is  but  one  God  and  Sa- 
viour, so  ALL  who  believe  and  obey  the  gospel  are  equally 
adopted  into  the  family  of  heaven  ;  equally  enjoy  all  the  prom- 
ised blessings  of  salvation,  are  equally  entitled  to  the  free  use 
of  all  the  means  of  grace,  —  are  baptized  into  one  faith  ;'  and 
are  called,  justified,  and  sanctified,  through  the  same  plan  of  re- 
deeming love  and  mercy.*  The  unity  of  the  christian  church, — 
as  we  shall  clearly  show  in  our  lectures  on  the  nature  of  a  true 
apostolical  succession,'  is  not  to  be  looked  for  in  any  uniformity 
in  rites,  ceremonies,  or  ecclesiastical  customs  ;  —  nor  in  any 
identity  as  to  church  forms,  polity  or  order  ;  — nor  in  any  sub- 
jection to  one  earthly  head,  or  one  ecclesiastical  polity." 

But  the  unity  of  the  church  consists  essentially  in  the  unity 
of  the  faith  whereby  all  its  members  equally  hold  the  same  di- 
vine truths  ;  and  in  the  unity  of  the  spirit,  or  that  oneness,  which 
subsists  between  Christ  its  head,  and  all  its  members,  and 
whereby  the  same  spirit  dwells  in  all,  and  works  in  all  the  same 
christian  graces.^ 

There  is  a  very  important  distinction  to  be  made  between 
union  and  unity.**     The  one  may   very  clearly  exist  where  the 

1)  See  the  Author's  Eccl.  Catech.  In  our  humble  judgment,  this  is  not 
of  the  Presb.  Ch.  a  truth,  and  has  always  been  practi- 

2)  24,  p.  15,  ed.  2d.  cally  denied  by  christians  of   every 

3)  See  Lect.  xx.  and  xxi.  age,  and  is  the  seminal  principle  and 

4)  Eccl.  Catech.  pp.  ]I5,  16.  basis  of  the  papacy  and  of  all  spiritual 

5)  Author'.*!  Eccl.  Cat.  p.  16,  tyranny  and  oppression,  and  to  be 
ed.  2d.  utterly  rejected  by  every  spiritual  free- 

G)  This  is  not,  however,  the  opin-  man.  No  wonder  that  from  this  ax- 
ion  of  the  Rev.  Thomas  H.  Vail,  as  ioniatic  assumption  our  author  came 
his  opinions  are  developed  in  his  to  describe  as  comprehensioe,  the  self- 
"  Comprehensive  Church,  or  Chris-  enclosed  boundaries  of  the  limited 
tian  Unity  and  Ecclesiastical  Union,"  prelacy;  and  to  regard  as  universal 
(Hartford,  1841.)  He  sets  out  with  those  peculiarities  which  are  eschev/- 
the  declaration  that  "the  writer  is  ed, as  without  scriptural  support,  by  a 
convinced  that  christian  union  can  large  and  growing  mass  of  protestant 
NEVER  be  effected  (and  of  course  never  Christendom.  If  unity  is  a  necessary 
yet  has  existed,)  except  upon  some  mark  of  the  true  church,  then  were 
plan  of  ECCLESIASTICAL  UNITY."  (ch.  the  apostolic  churches  no  true  church- 
i.  p.  25.)  "  It  is  EVIDENTLY  a  scriptu-  es  of  Christ,  for  they  were  divided 
ral  truth,  that  the  church  must  be  one  among  themselves  ;  nor  has  there  ever 
body,   BOTH    IN   UESPECT   OF   ITS   EX-  existed  such  a  church  from  their  time 

TERNAL    UNITY,  AND    OF  ITS    INTERNAL  UUtll  the  presCUt. 

unity;    and  this  trutii   has  been  ac-  "The   Church    of  England,"   says 

knowledged    by    christians   of   every  Dr.  Hawks,  "  and  the  protestant  epis- 

name,  and  in  every  age,  the  present  copal  church  in  the  United  States,  are 

as  well  as  the  past.  "  (p.  27.)  now  both  in  "  the  unity  of  the  catholic 


LECT.  XVII.]  UNITY   AND    UNION    DISTINGCISHED.  427 

Other  is  wanting.  There  may  be  unity  in  sentiment,  in  doctrine, 
and  in  feehng,  where  there  is  no  union  in  any  organized  denomi- 
national government,  under  the  same  rules  and  the  same  laws. 
As  it  regards  the  christian  church,  —  where  there  is  concurrence 
in  the  same  essential  and  fundamental  doctrines  which  are  cha- 
racteristic of  that  mystical  body,  —  there,  is  christian  unity, 
the  unity  of  the  spirit.  But  those  principles  of  doctrine  and  or- 
der which  were  made  necessary  to  be  believed,  in  order  to  a  full 
communion  with  the  church  of  Christ,  for  the  first  three  centu- 
ries, may  be  firmly  held  and  retained,  where  there  are  separate 
organizations  under  independent  rulers,  and  under  ecclesiastical 
laws  differing  from  each  other  on  many  points,  not  regarded  as 
within  the  limits  of  articles  which  are  fundamental.  There  may, 
in  this  case,  be  christian  unity  where  there  is  no  ecclesiastical 
union.  These  various  churches  may  all  be  members  of  the  one 
christian  family  ;  may  all  recognize  the  one  head  or  parent  of 
that  family;  may  all  receive  their  being  from  Him,  and  be  united 
together  by  the  ties,  as  it  were,  of  a  blood  relationship;  and 
this,  too,  although,  like  the  brethren  of  too  many  human  families, 
they  have  become  a  divided  household,  and  alienated  from  each 
other  in  spirit,  and  in  many  of  their  views. 

"  Union  is  preserved,"  says  Dr.  Hawks  in  his  Constitution  of 
the  Episcopal  Church,  "  by  means  of  subordination  to  the  same 
ecclesiastical  law,  and  a  common  ecclesiastical  ruler ;  unity  by 
an  adherence  to  the  same  common  faith  of  the  gospel." 

On  no  other  ground  than  this,  can  any  church  in  existence, 
for  one  moment  substantiate  a  claim  to  the  character  and  being 
of  a  church  of  Christ.  For  if  union  (as  thus  defined)  is  neces- 
sary to  the  perpetuation  of  the  christian  church,  then,  as  there  is 

church,"     though    "  under    different  without   any  universal    monarch    in 

systems  of  polity.  either  case,"  or  identity  of  laws,  offi- 

"  All   communion    of    churches,'  cers  or  government.   (See  ibid,  p.  15.) 

says  Dr.  Owen,  (VVks.  vol.  XX.  p.  291,)  "When    the    fathers    speak    of    the 

"as  such,  consists  in  the  communion  church,  they  mean  not  any  particular 

of  faith  and  love,  in  the  administra-  church,  but  the  wiiole  body  or  church 

tion  of  the  same  sacraments,  and  com-  of    christians,    though    divided    into 

mon  advice  in  things  of  common  con-  many  nations  or  churches."      (Ibid,  p. 

cernment.    All  these  may  be  observed,  18.)     "The  unity  of  the  clmrch  was 

when,for  sundry  reasons,  the  members  then  understood,  not  as  being  united 

of  them  cannot  have  local  presential  under  one  supreme   bishop  or  church, 

communion  in  some  ordinances  with  but  in  the  concord   and   good  agree- 

each  church  distinctly."  ment  of  the  several  churclies  among 

"  There  may  be   unity  even  where  themselves,  and   in  the  unity  of  the 

there  are  differences  and   separation,  common  faith."  (Ibid,  p.  19.    See  also 

just  as  there  are  laws  of  war  wherein  pp.  174,  183.) 

all  agree.    (See  Leslie's  Short  Method  " on  unity  in  saving  or  damning 

with  the   Romanists,  Edinb.  1835,  p.  principles  and   practices,  in  love  and 

13.)     "As  all  nations  upon  the  earth  charity,  for  which  chiefly  we  sliall  be 

are  one  kingdom  to  God,  so  all  chris-  judged  at  the  last  day."  (Ibid,  p.  180.) 
tian  churches  are  one  church  to  Christ, 


428  PRELATIC    EXCLUSIVENESS    OF    SCHISM.  [LECT.  XVII. 

no  such  union  to  be  found,  so  is  there  no  church  extant.  Chris- 
tendom is  avowedly  disparted,  by  its  various  lines  of  circumscribed 
denominational  boundaries.  Now  it  matters  not  how  this  disu- 
nion came  about,  since  that  it  now  exists  cannot  be  denied.  For 
whether  the  ancient  sects  went  out  from  the  church,  or  the 
church  ejected  them  —  whether  the  Greek  church  threw  off  the 
Latin,  or  the  Latin  separated  from  the  Greek,  and  thenceforward 
usurped  the  sole  supremacy  —  whether  tiie  English  church  was 
excommunicated  and  cut  off  by  the  Romish,  or  the  Romish  ab- 
jured by  the  English  —  whether  the  reformed  churches  were 
necessitated  to  separate  and  become  independent  organizations  by 
the  tyrannical,  antichrisiian,  and  schismatical  conduct  of  Rome, 
or  were  violently  thrust  out  by  her  as  poUutors  of  the  sanctuary 
—  none  can  deny  the  fact  that  all  these  churches  are  actually 
in  existence,  and  that,  too,  under  independent  ecclesiastical  or- 
ganizations. And,  therefore,  there  is  either  no  church  on  earth, 
Romish,  Greek,  Anglican,  or  any  other,  —  which  God  forbid  ;  or, 
on  the  other  hand,  union  is  not  necessary  to  christian  unity; 
nor  is  diversity  of  rules,  orders  and  forms,  in  matters  not  essen- 
tial to  the  very  being  of  a  church,  any  hindrance  to  such  unity 
in  all  that  is  fundamental. 

In  this  country,  prior  to  the  organization  of  the  episcopal 
church  in  1789,  the  churches  in  each  state  considered  themselves 
as  an  integral  part  of  the  church  of  Christ,  while,  as  Dr.  Hawks 
affirms,  "perfectly  independent  in  their  government  of  any  and 
every  branch  of  the  church  in  Christendom."  And  this  is  one 
of  the  rights  still  retained  by  the  several  dioceses  under  the  con- 
stitution. 

The  fact,  therefore,  that  presbyterians  live  in  a  different  house, 
and  order  their  domestic  economy  in  a  form  different  from  their 
neighbors,  who  dwell  in  the  Romish  or  in  the  Episcopal  quarter 
of  the  heavenly  city,  and  who  have,  as  they  believe,  more  or  less 
materially  altered  the  heavenly  discipline  ;  this  does  not  prove  that 
we  are  not  still  fellow-citizens  with  them  in  this  spiritual  Je- 
rusalem, and  partakers  with  them  of  all  its  benefits  and  blessings. 

In  order,  therefore,  to  make  out  a  case  against  us,  it  must  be 
shown,  as  has  been  largely  proved,  that  prelacy  is  of  divine  right, 
and  of  absolute  essentiality  to  the  very  being  of  the  church ;  or 
otherwise,  that  we  have  apostatized  from  the  fundamental  doc- 
trines upon  which  the  church  is  founded.  And  as  the  former  is 
impossible,  and  the  latter  will  not  be  pretended,  therefore  is  our 
attempted  exclusion  from  the  rank  of  a  true  church  of  Christ, 
essentially  the  crime  of  schism. 

It  is  amazing,  with  what  assurance  the  most  preposterous 
doctrines,  on  this  subject,  have  been  boldly  put  forth.   Unity  — 


LECT.  XVII.]  WHEREIN    TRUE    UNITY    CONSISTS.  429 

the  unity  of  the  catholic  church  —  has  heen  harped  upon  until 
many  are,  verily,  ready  to  believe  that  a  body,  however  really 
divided,  that  will  only  asseverate  its  unity  —  is  thereby  possess- 
ed of  a  true  and  sure  mark  of  the  church  of  Christ.  Just  as 
if  unity  may  not  belong  to  a  body  of  rebels,  as  well  as  to  an 
army  of  loyal  subjects,  or  as  if,  to  use  the  words  of  Dr.  Clag- 
gett,'  "  the  harlot  cannot  be  one  as  well  as  the  spouse." 

Unity  can  only,  then,  be  any  mark,  whatever,  of  the  true 
church,  when  it  is  such  a  unity  as  is  made  obligatory  upon  her 
by  the  scriptures,  that  is,  unity  in  the  faith,    unity  in 

THE     SPIRIT     OF     CHRISTIAN     LOVE,      CHARITY     AND      CONCORD. 

Unity  of  association,  that  is,  external  union,  can  only  be  a  duty, 
when  the  terms  required  for  such  communion  are  scriptural,  ne- 
cessary and  proper :  and  to  judge,  therefore,  of  the  sufficiency 
of  any  plea  for  'unity,  we  must  first  ascertain  what  are  the  prin- 
ciples upon  which  the  profession  of  such  union  is  based.  For, 
so  far  is  mere  union  from  being  a  sure  mark  of  the  true  church, 
that  our  Saviour  contrasts  the  church  to  the  kingdom  of  Satan, 
in  that  while  it  may  be  externally  divided,  and  yet  be  really 
united  ;  the  synagogue  of  Satan  is  not  divided  against  itself,  but 
remains  confederated  together  by  the  unholy  bonds  of  a  self- 
aggrandizing  alliance." 

The  unity  of  the  church  depends  upon  the  maintenance  of 
that  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus,  which  unites  to  Him,  the  living  head  ; 
and  of  that  love,  charity  and  concord,  by  which  all  its  churches 
are  bound  together,  as  confederated  members  of  the  same 
heavenly  commonwealth. 

Dr.  Barrow,  in  his  learned  Discourse  on  the  Unity  of  the 
Church,  reduces  it  to  the  following  heads,  which  are  all  includ- 
ed under  those  we  have  now  summarily  presented.^  Unity  of 
the  church  implies,  he  says,  first,  consent  in  faith  and  opinion 
concerning  all  principal  matters  of  doctrine*  —  secondly,  it  im- 
plies union  in  the  bands  of  charity  and  good-wilP  —  thirdly, 
spiritual  cognation  and  alliance,  all  being  regenerated  by  the 
same  incorruptible  seed^  —  fourthly,  incorporation  into  the  mys- 
tical body  of  Christ,  and  participation  in  the  same  benefits'  — 
fifthly,  union  in  peaceable  concord  and  confederacy,  so  that 
they  are  bound  to  live  together  in  good  correspondence.^  The 
concurrence  of  the  pastors  of  the  church,  especially  in  doctrine, 
in  peace,  and  friendly  intercourse,  and  for  the  preservation  of 
truth  and  charity. 9     Such  a  unity  in  discipline  as  is  required  by 

1)  Notes  of  the  Ch.  p.  169.  6;  Ibid. 

2)  See  Matth.  xii.  and  ibid  p.  180.  7)  Ibid. 

3)  See  Wks.  fol.  vol.  i.  8)  Ibid,  p.  765. 

4)  Ibid,  pp  762,  763.  9)  Ibid,  p.  767. 

5)  Ibid,  p.  764. 


430 


THE    TRUE    NATURE    OF    UNITY    DESCRIBED.       [lECT.  XVII. 


the  indispensable  sanctions,  and  institutions,  of  their  sovereign.* 
Tliey  are  bound  to  all  the  same  sacraments  —  and  "  to  uphold 
that  sort  of  order,  government  and  ministry,  in  all  its  substantial 
parts,  which  God  did  appoint  in  the  church."  "  In  lesser  mat- 
ters of  ceremony  or  discipline,  instituted  by  human  prudence, 
churches  may  differ,  and  it  is  expedient  they  should  do  so,'^  &ic. 
This  is  all  which  this  great  writer  considered  to  be  scripturally 
included  under  the  unity  of  the  church  of  Christ.*  Similar  are 
the  views  given  of  the  unity  of  the  church,  by  other  divines  of 
high  authority,  as  by  Stillingfleet^  —  by  Archbishop  Potter*  — 
by  Bishop  Seabury^  —  by  Dr.  Jackson'' — by  Dr.  Claggetl''  — 
by  the  Oxford  divines  themselves^ —  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Hinds^  — 
by  Bishop  Pearson'"  —  by  Archbishop  Usher"  —  by  Bingham"^  — 
by  Dr.  Rice'^ — by  Dr.  McCrie'* — and  by  others,  were  it  neces- 
sary to  enlarge. 


1)  Ibid,  p.  768. 

2)  His  eighth  head  refers  to  con- 
formity in  great  matters  of  prudential 
discipline,  though  not  instituted  by 
God,  which  he  only  proves  by  authori- 
ty of  the  council  of  Nice. 

3)  Iren.  pp.  121.  122, 108,  120. 

4)  On  Ch.  Govt.  pp.  12, 13,  28, 
29,  Am.  ed. 

5)  See  Sermon  on  Christian  Uni- 
ty, which  he  refers  to  the  unity  of  its 
head  —  of  its  faith  —  of  its  baptism  — 
of  its  heavenly  guardian,  God — of 
its  hope. 

6)  See  Wks.  fol.  vol.  iii.  pp.  875, 
877. 

7)  In  Notes  of  the  Ch.  Exam.  p. 
190. 

8)  Oxf.  Tr.  vol.  i.  pp.  240,  259. 

9)  Hind's  Rise  and  Progress  of 
Christianity,  vol.  ii.  p.  39,  &c.,  and  p. 
92,  &c. 

10)  "  Christian  unity,"  says  Bishop 
Pearson,  "  has  principal  relation  to  the 
unity  of  faith."    On  the  Creed,  p.  17. 

II j  So  also  Archbishop  Usher,  in 
his  discourse  on  this  subject  delivered 
before  his  Majesty,  |>laces  the  unity 
of  the  church  principally  on  the  unity 
of  the  faith  professed  therein,  and  the 
unity  of  the  Spirit.  Lond.  1087,  pp. 
10,11. 

12)  Bingham,  in  his  very  full  and 
learned  Dissertation  on  the  Ancient 
Doctrine  of  the  Unity  of  the  Church, 
first  treats  of  that  unity  which  was 
reirarded  as  "  fundamental  to  the  very 
beinc  of  a  church,  being  absolutely 
necessary  and  essential  ;  (Antiq.  b. 
xvi.  ch.  i.  vol.  vi.  p.  10 ; )  and  this  he 


describes  as,  first,  the  unity  of  faith 
and  obedience  to  the  laws  of  Christ ; 
and,  secondly,  the  unity  of  love  and 
charity.  He  then  proceeds  to  dis- 
course upon  "  otiier  sorts  of  unity 
necessary  to  the  well-being  of  the 
church,"  (Lect.  iii.  p.  10,)  among 
which  he  reckons  "  the  necessary 
use  of  baptism }  secondly,  unity  of 
worship  ;  thirdly,  unity  of  subjection 
of  piesbyters  and  people  to  their  bish- 
op ;  fourthly,  unity  of  submission  to 
the  discipline  of  the  church." 

13)  "The  unity  of  the  church," 
according  to  the  Essays  on  the  Church 
in  Dr.  Rice's  Magazine,  (Evang.  and 
liit.  Mag.  vol.  ix.  p.  130,)  consists, 
1st,  in  its  one  head,  namely,  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ ;  2d,  in  its  profession  of 
one  faith,  or  its  holding  every  where 
the  same  great  system  of  doctrine ; 
3d,  in  that  it  every  where,  in  all  its 
branches,  celebrates  the  same  sacra- 
ments as  badges  of  the  same  profes- 
sion, and  signs  of  the  same  system  of 
saving  truth."  "  It  ought,  however, 
to  be  understood,  that  this  unity  does 
not  consist  in  the  mere  form  or  mode 
of  administration,  but  in  the  use  of 
the  same  elements  to  represent  the 
same  spiritual  truths."  4th,  in  that 
common  hope  which  is  cherished  by 
the  whole  body  of  believers  ;  5th,  in 
the  same  mind  or  spirit ;  6th,  in  their 
common  participation  of  the  influences 
of  the  same  ever-blessed  and  divine 
Spirit. 

14)  Such,  also,  are  the  outlines  of 
this  unity,  as  given  by  Dr.  McCrie,  in 
his  Discourses  on   the  Unity  of  the 


LECT.  XVII.]         THE    SCKIPTXJRAL   MEANING    OF    SCHISM.  431 

From  this  exhibition  of  the  true  nature  of  that  scriptural  unity 
which  is  descriptive  of  the  various  portions  of  the  one,  holy 
catholic,  and  apostolic  church  ;  the  character  of  schism  which 
is  the  violation  of  this  unity,  will  be  as  clearly  perceived.  For, 
as  unity  consists  in  the  harmonious  relation  of  all  the  members 
of  this  universal  body  to  one  another,  and  to  Christ  as  their  one, 
common  and  equal  Lord  and  Master ;  so  is  schism  to  be 
found,  in  its  measure,  in  whatever  has  a  tendency  to  disturb  such 
harmony  with  one  another,  or  to  destroy,  or  prevent  such  union 
with  their  divine  head.  Whatever,  then,  would  alienate  christian 
brethren,  —  whatever  would  excite  envy,  jealousy  or  hatred  ;  — 
whatever  would  needlessly  restrain  christian  liberty ;  —  what- 
ever would  require  conscientious  nonconformity  or  separation  ; 
—  whatever  would  mar  the  purity  of  the  truth  ;  —  or  isolate  one 
portion  of  the  church  from  others  —  this  is  of  the  nature  of 
schism. 

The  term,  in  its  original  import,  signifies  a  rent,  division,  or 
separation.  It  is  used  in  a  figurative  or  secondary  sense,  six 
times  in  the  New  Testament ;  thrice  in  the  Gospel  of  St.  John, 
in  reference  to  the  differences  among  the  Jews  respecting  Christ, 
and  thrice  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  as  applicable  to  the 
divisions,  which  had  arisen  among  the  members  of  that  church.* 
In  only  one  passage  in  our  vernacular  translation  is  the  word 
rendered  "  schism,"^  being  in  these  other  passages  translated  by 
the  word  "  division."'* 

Now  as  it  regards  the  cases  to  which  the  word  is  applied  in 
the    gospels,   there    was    first    a   difference    and   contrariety   of 

Church,  (Edin.  1621,  p.  17,  tStc.)    This  essay,  for  which  Sir  Calling  Eardley 

unity  consists,  1st,  in  her  having  one  Smith  offered  a  prize  of  one  hundred 

head   and   Lord;  2d,  in   the  unity  of  pounds  sterling,  which  was  adjudged 

the  faith  ;  'Sd,   in    fellowship    in    the  to  this. 

same  worship  of  which  baptism  is  the  On    the    true  idea  of,  see  Owen's 

solemn  badge  ;  4th,  in  respect  of  ex-  Wks.  vol.  xix.  p.  160,  et  preced. 
ternal  government  and  discipline,  "  as  See  also   Knapps  Theology,  vol.  i. 

far  as  is   expressly  enjoined   in  scrip-  p.  484. 

ture,  or  may   be   deduced    by  native  "  God,"   says  Stillingfleet,   (Irenic. 

inference   from  the  general  rules  and  pp.  121,  122,)  "  will  one  day  convince 

particular  examples  recorded   in  it ;  "  men  that  the  union  of  the  churclj  lies 

5th,  in    the    bond  of  mutual  charity  more   in  the  unity  of  faith  and  affec- 

and  peace.  tion    than    in   uniformity  of  doubtful 

Such,  also,  are  the  views  presented  rites  and  ceremonies." 
by  Dr.  Harris,  in   his   Union,  or  the  1)  "So   there    vi^as    a   division." 

Divided  Church  made  One,  Am.  ed.  John  vii.  43,  xi.  16,  and  x.  19. 
IJoston,  1838,  ch.  ii.  2)  1  Cor.  i.  10,  xi.  18,  and  xii.  25. 

See  also  tlie  Unity  of  the  Church,  3)  1  Cor.  xii.  25. 

by  the  Rev.  Baptist  Noel,  27lh  cd.  4)  On  its  scriptural  meaning,  see 

Lond.  1838.  full    in    Dr.    Owen's    Treatise  on,  in 

See  also  Schism  as  opposed  to  the  Wks.  vol.  xix.  p.  123,  &c.;  and  on  the 

Unity  of  the  Ciiurch,  by  Dr.  Hoppus,  case  of  the   Corinthian   church,   ibid, 

Lond.  1839,  2d  ed.     This  is  a  prize  p.  125,  &,c. 


432  THE    SCRIPTURAL    MEANING    OF    SCHISM.  [lECT.  XVII. 

opinion  ;  and  secondly,  an  alienation  of  feeling,  leading  the  one 
party  to  violence,  while  the  other  were  required  conscientiously 
to  maintain  their  views.  As  it  regards  the  case  of  the  Corinthian 
church,  we  find  that  parties,  attached  to  different  teachers,  had 
arisen  in  that  church.  These  were  led  to  cherish  variant  opinions 
in  some  matters,  and  cold,  and  disaffected  feelings  towards  one 
another.  The  consequences  were  gross  violations  of  decency 
and  order  in  the  observance  of  divine  worship — contentions 
respecting  their  ministers  —  and  unbrotherly  and  unciiristian 
scenes  among  themselves.  It  is  for  these  things  they  are  rebuked 
by  the  apostle,  for  their  adoption  of  party  names,  and  the  un- 
charitable insinuation,  that  others  did  not  love  the  Saviour  as 
much  as  they  —  for  their  perversion  and  abuse  of  the  instituted 
means  of  grace  —  for  their  obstinate  continuance  in  these  evil 
courses  —  and  their  unholy  contentions  about  them.  This  is 
what  the  apostle  denominates  schism. 

You  will  also  observe,  as  a  fact  most  important  in  this  inqui- 
ry, that  all  these  evils  were  found  to  exist  in  the  one  church  of 
Corinth,  and  while  it  still  remained  denominationally  one  church. 
It  was  an  internal  mischief  which  had  superinduced  such  un- 
happy and  lamentable  consequences.  Neither  have  we  any  in- 
timation whatever,  that  any  actual  separation  into  distinct  socie- 
ties had  taken  place  at  Corinth.  All  that  we  read  of,  was  the 
existence,  in  this  christian  society,  of  factious  dissensions. 
"From  the  entire  testimony  of  scripture  respecting  this  subject, 
we  conclude,"  says  the  author  of  the  late  elaborate  treatise  up- 
on this  subject,!  "  that  the  schisms  condemned,  were  such  differ- 
ences of  opinion,  and  of  feeling,  among  the  members  of  one 
particular  church,  on  matters  connected  with  their  common  in- 
terest as  professed  christians,  as  produced  heartburnings,  alien- 
ations, contentions,  party-spirit,  and  other  uncharitable  tempers, 
and  unseemly  conduct."^  "The  scripture  examples  of  schism, 
exhibit  it  as  little  different  from  variance,  strife,  faction,  or  even 
heresy,  in  the  original  meaning  of  this  term."^     Schism,  then, 

1)  Schism  as  opposed  to  the  Unity      church   by   the   term    schism.      See 
of  the    Church,    by   Dr.  Hoppus,  p.       Owen's  Wks.  vol.  xix.  p.  127. 

592,  Lond.  ed.  1839,  see  part  ii.  ch.  i.  Of  this   schism   in   the   Corinthian 

where  these  views  will  be  found  en-  ciiurcli,  in  the  days  of  Clemens  Ro- 

larged  upon.  manus,   see   a  full    account    in    Dr. 

2)  Schism,  p.  227.  Owen's  Wks.  vol.  xix  p.  127. 

3)  a.i^n7i;,  a  sect   or  choice,  see  "  Leaving  the  scriptures,"  says  he, 
Acts  XXVI.  5  :  see  ibid,  p.  232.  "  the  next  instance  of  schism  to  which 

Even   in   the  time  of  Clemens  Ro-  our  attention  is  turned,  is  connected 

manus,  this    original    and    scriptural  with  this  same  Corinthian  church,  as 

meaning  of  the    term   was   retained,  it  is  given  in  the  epistle  of  Clemens 

since    he  everywhere   in    his  epistle  Romanus."  "  And  that  whicli  he  calls 

denominates    the   dift'erenccs   in    that  schism  (Owen's  Wks.  vol.  xx.  p.  211.) 


1,KCT.  XVII.]  THE    SCRIPTURE   DOCTRINE    OF    SCHISM.  433 

as  described  in  the  word  of  God,  though  sinful,  is  far  from  being 
necessarily  damnable  ; — though  most  reprehensible,  it  is  not 
necessarily  exclusive  of  the  divine  favor;  —  though  destructive 
to  the  prosperity,  peace,  and  harmony  of  the  church,  yet  not 
absolutely  to  its  character  as  a  church.  Schism,  therefore,  is  an 
offence  against  the  unity  of  the  church,  arising  from  a  slate  of 
mind  at  variance  with  the  humility  and  charity  of  the  gospel. 
It  is  an  offence,  consequently,  which  can  only  be  committed  by 
those  who  are  within  the  church,  whether  we  consider  it  in  ref- 
erence to  a  particular  congregation,  or  to  different  congregations, 
or  denominations  ;  and  therefore,  to  affirm  of  any  individual,  of 
any  congregation,  or  of  any  denomination,  that  they  are  schis- 
matics, is  to  declare  that  while  still  related  to  the  visible  church 
of  Christ,  and  connected  with  it,  they  are  yet  chargeable  with 
unchristian  conduct.' 

As  the  unity  of  the  church  does  not  and  cannot  be  supposed 
to  mean  the  union  of  the  whole  church  in  one  body,  under  one 
government  or  sovereign  authority,*  —  so  it  is  plain  that  the 
mere  fact  that  any  denomination  of  christians  is  not  found  thus 
subject  to  the  same  ecclesiastical  government  with  some  other, 
does  not  fairly  implicate  it  in  a  charge  of  schism,  or  exclude  it 
from  the  pale  of  Christ's  true  church. 

Separation,  then,  does  not  certainly  imply  schism.  There  may 
be  disunion  where  there  are  preserved  the  essentials  of  christian 
unity.  The  doctrine  that  the  catholic  church  is  one  body,  only 
began  to  prevail  in  the  third  century.*     In  the  beginning  it  was 

in  thatchurch.  he  calls  also  strife,  con-  are  still  catholics,  that  is,  incorporated 

tention,  sedition,  Uimult ;  and  it  may  menil)ers  of  the  visible  church.     And 

be  observed  concerning  th;it  schism,  if  we  are  not  thus  members,  then  most 

as   all    the    ancients  call    it,  that   the  assuredly  we  are  not  schismatics.    Let 

church    continued  its   state  and   out-  prelatists,   therefore,    choose    for    us 

ward  communion.     There  is  no  men-  whatever  portion   they,  in  their  wis- 

tion  of  any  that  separated  from  it,  that  dom,  may  see  fit  ;  we  trust,  however, 

constituted  anew  church."  they  will  not  sacrifice  all  claim  to  the 

1)    It   is  ridiculous  to   argue,  as  attribute  of  wisdom,  in   assigning  us 

prelatists  do,  that  even  were  we  schis-  such  a  contradictory  and   paradoxical 

matical,  we  were  on  that  account  no  situation   as  that,  like  limbo,  its   real 

longer  a  part  of  the  catholic  church.  portion  never  can  be  discovered.    See 

For  if  we   are   schismatics,   we   must  this  shown  to  have  been  the  sense  of 

belong  to  that  body  in  which  we  are  the  ancients  in  Bingham,  Antiq.b.  xvi. 

schismatics  ;  since  it  is  only  as  mem-  §  17. 

bers  of  the  one  body  we  could  possi-  2)  See  twelve  arguments  in  proof 

bly  be  chargeable  with  schism.     But  of  this,  with  answers  to  Objections  in 

this  body  is  the  catholic  church,  and  Barrow's   Disc.   Wks.  vol.  i.  pp.  7G9, 

therefore  as  long  as  we  are  schisniat-  7o0. 

ics,  we   are   an  integral  part  of  that  3)  See    Riddle's    Eccl.   Chronol. 

bodj',  and  cannot  be  cut  off  from  it,  Lond.  1840,  p.  33. 

otherwise  we  must  cease  to  be  schis-  "  Previously  to  the  third  century," 

mat.ics  in  a  body  to  which  we  do  not  says  the  Rev.  Mr.  Riddle,  "  a  real,  liv- 

belong.     If,  then,  we  are  schismatics,  ing  unity,  a.nd  a  well  regulated  hlierty,^ 

we  have  this  comfort  left  us,  that  we  characterized  the  early  constitution  of 

55 


434 


THE    PRIMITIVE    DOCTRmE    OF    SCHISM.       [LECT.  XVII. 


not  SO.  Then,  all  the  churches  were  ecclesiastically  indepen- 
dent, separate,  and  distinct,  and  united  only  by  the  bonds  of 
mutual  charity,  and  the  acknowledgment  of  one  common  faith. 
The  violation  of  this  charity — the  breach  of  this  holy  alliance 
and  concord — was  what  was  then  understood  by  schism.  And 
if  Dr.  Barrow  is  competent  to  decide,  the  fathers  also,'  "  in  their 
set  treatises,  and  in  their  incidental  discourses  about  the  unity 
of  the  church,  (which  was  de  facto,  which  should  be  de  jure  in 
the  church,)  do  make  it  to  consist  only  in  those  unions  of  faith, 
charity,  peace,  which  we  have  described,  not  in  this  political 
union." 

In  support  of  this  opinion,  he  presents  quotations,  in  addition 
to  others  already  adduced  by  him,  from  Tertullian,  Epiphanius, 
Constantine  the  Great,  Gregory  the  Great,  Clemens  Alexaiidri- 
nus,  Jerome,  &c.^ 


the  church.  But  liberty  was  after- 
wards sacrificed  to  unity  ;  and  this 
unity  itself  degenerated  into  a  merely 
external,  forced  and  dead  union,  which 
became  subservient  to  the  purposes  of 
oppression,  and  to  the  growth  of  the 
hierarchy." 

The  results  which  followed  from 
this  doctrine  of  the  unity  of  the  catho- 
lic church,  are  exhibited  by  Euthe- 
rius,  Bishop  of  Tyana,  A.  D.  431,  in 
the  preface  to  his  work  against  here- 
sies. "  Its  subject,"  says  Clarke,  (Sue. 
of  Sacred  Lit.  vol.  ii.  p.  194.)  "  is  the 
woful  effects  of  ecclesiastical  dis- 
turbances and  persecutions;  and  it 
shows  how  much  earlier  the  spirit  of 
the  inquisition  existed  in  the  catho- 
lic church  than  the  institution  it- 
self." 

"  Eutherius  complains  of  the  vio- 
lent methods  the  ecclesiastics  of  those 
days  resorted  to,  that  those  who  differ- 
ed might  be  brought  back  to  the  unity 
of  the  church  ;  that  they  used  civil 
power  to  produce  religious  uniformity  ; 
and  persecution  was  to  enlighten  or 
reduce  a  dark  or  refiactory  mind.  '  It 
is  said  tliat  henceforth  they  will  do 
things  hitherto  unventured  on ;  that 
they  will  no  longer  underhand  and 
occasionally  accuse  the  simple  of  here- 
sy ;  but  that,  possessing  the  supreme 
power,  they  will  madly  rage  and  im- 
periously command  ;  will  prescribe 
laws,  force  to  their  opinions,  demand 
instant  obedience,  condemn  and  pun- 
ish the  study  oi'  true  holiness  ;  that 
they  will  revile  some  and  banish 
others ;  involve    one   in    accusations, 


and  despoil  another  of  his  credit ; 
browbeat  this,  and  by  vaunting  per- 
suade that;  —  I  say  nothing  of  bonds, 
prisons,  fines,  disgrace,  stripes,  piteous 
sights  of  slaughter,  almost  incredible, 
though  seen  :  and  this  tragedy  is  acted 
by  priests  !  (Oh,  impious  daring  !  oh, 
intolerable  judgment !)  with  whom 
the  commencement  of  public  worship 
and  teaching  is  that  most  delightful 
address,  '  Peace  be  with  you  all.' 
Without  judgment  comes  condemna- 
tion ;  without  accusation,  sentence ; 
audacity  is  esteemed  courage  ;  cruelty 
is  named  zeal ;  fraud  is  regarded  as 
wisdom.  What  tragic  strain  of  wail- 
ing is  sufficiently  mournful  !  the  lam- 
entations of  Jeremiah  are  too  weak 
for  the  multitude  and  magnitude  of 
these  evils.  But  from  their  fruits  ye 
shall  know  them  ;  and  the  fruits  of 
these  present  laborers  are  to  scatter, 
not  to  assemble  ;  to  persecute,  not  to 
bring  back  ;  to  cast  down,  not  to  raise 
up  ;  to  wound,  not  to  heal ;  to  hate 
the  wanderers,  not  to  seek  the  wan- 
derers.' Thus  does  Eutherius  de- 
scribe the  ancient  methods  of  christian 
persecution  in  those  days." 

See  also  King's  Primitive  Christ, 
pp.  1(J2,  181. 

1)  Works,  vol.  i.p.  770. 

2)  See  ibid. 

Hence  will  be  apparent,  how  con- 
trary to  all  truth  is  ihe  definition  given 
of  schism  by  |)relatists,  that  "it  is  a 
direct  violation  of  the  order  and  gov- 
ernment established  in  the  church, 
(that  is,  the  one  visible  church  of  the 
prelacy,)  and  a  consequent  separation 


LECT.  XVII.]  LATER  DOCTRINE  OF  SCHISM  AND  ITS  CONSEQUENCES.  435 

It  is,  however,  undoubtedly  true,  that  the  established  ecclesi- 
astical idea  of  schism,  as  most  frequently  presented  by  the  later 
fathers,  is  separation  from  the  worship  and  communion  of  some 
particular  church  or  churches,  and  from  their  ecclesiastical  gov- 
ernment and  control.  Thus  Augustine  defines  schism  to  be  "  a 
recent  separation  in  a  church  on  account  of  some  difference  of 
opinion."'  It  thus  became  an  ecclesiastical  sin  committed  against 
church  order  and  auihority  —  against  the  pride,  pomp,  and  rule 
of  the  governors  of  the  church  —  and  against  their  assumed 
supremacy  and  exclusive  jurisdiction  — and  not  against  the  love, 
truth,  and  charity  of  the  gospel. «  The  result  of  this  progressive 
change  of  opinion,  was  the  consolidated  spiritual  monarchy  and 
despotism  of  the  Romish  hierarchy. 

But  as  such  a  union  is  neither  possible,  nor  proper,  nor  accord- 
ant to  scripture  and  primitive  Christianity,  so  is  it  certain  that 
separate  organization  in  an  ecclesiastical  capacity  cannot, 
of  itself,  establish  against  any  church  or  denomination  the 
charge  of  schism.  Otherwise  the  apostolic  and  primitive  church- 
es were  all  schismatical,^  and,  along  with  them,  every  church  that 


from  it."  (Daubeny's  Guide  to  the 
Ch.  vol.  i.  p.  45.) 

Dauben}'  distinctly  refers  the  charge 
of  schism  to  the  rejection  of  commun- 
ion with  "  a  church  established  by 
public  authority."  Guide  to  the  Ch. 
vol.  i.  p.  47. 

"It  is  maintained  by  Dr.  Barrow," 
(in  Powell  on  Ap.  Sue.  p  300,)  "on  the 
supremacy  of  tlie  pope,  that  the  an- 
cients did  assert  to  each  bishop  a  free, 
absolute,  independent  authority,  sub- 
jected to  none,  directed  by  none,  ac- 
countable to  none,  in  the  administra- 
tion of  affairs  properly  concerning  his 
church."  Suppos.  v.  §  v.  p.  220,  4to. 
edit.  1G80.  Cyprian  maintains  it  as 
Dr.  Barrow  there  shows ;  and  see 
Vitringa  de  Syn.  vet  lib.  iii.  cap.  xvii. 
p.  857,  &c.;  Mosheim  de  Reb.  ante 
Constant,  p.  152;  and  Burnet's  Ref. 
vol.  ii.  anno  1559. 

See  Note  B. 

1)  See  in  Schism,  p.  232;  where 
see  also  Zonaria's  similar  Definition. 

2)  See  illustrated  in  ibid,  p.  235. 

3)  That  there  were  in  apostolical 
times,  separate  and  distinct  churches 
in  the  same  provinces,  appears  mani- 
fest. Gal.  i.  22  ;  Acts  ix.  31 ;  Gal.  i. 
2  ;  Acts  xvi.;  Phil.  i.  1 ;  Acts  xiv.  22. 

Grotius  in  his  Annot.  on  1  Tim.  v. 
17,  affirms  that  in  primitive  times  there 
were  many  churches  in  each  of  the 
cities,  and  that  each  of  these  churches 


had  its  own  president  or  bishop,  and 
that  Alexandria  was  peculiar  in  hav- 
ing but  one.  See  the  same  largely 
proved  in  his  work  de  Imperio,  pp. 
355,  356,  357. 

Grotius  was  of  opinion,  that  old 
churches  were  formed  in  imitation  of 
the  synagogues,  and  that  one  city  had 
divers  churches  and  bishops  as  well  as 
divers  synagogues.  And  Dr.  Ham- 
mond thought  that  Rome,  Anlioch, 
and  other  cities,  had  two  cliurches  and 
bishops,  one  of  Jews  and  another  of 
Gentiles ;  and  that  Peter  and  Paul 
had  two  churches  at  Rome.  The 
churches  of  Constantinople,  Antioch, 
and  Alexandria,  and  many  other 
places,  also  had  two  churches  at  once 
by  their  divisions,  and  none  so  long 
as  Rome.  See  Baxter's  True  and 
Only  Way  of  Concord,  Lond.  1680, 
part  iii.  p.  95. 

There  is  evidence  to  prove,  that 
bishops  were  ordained  in  villages,  in 
the  outskirts  of  cities,  and  often  two 
in  the  same  city  ;  and  of  course  all 
bishops  were  supreme  in  their  own 
districts,  and  independent  of  every 
other,  while  yet  the  unity  of  the  church 
remained.  See  Corbet  on  the  Ch. 
pp.  105,  107.  That  there  were  either 
separate  churches  for  the  Hebrew 
christians,  or  a  toleration  in  tliem  of 
the  observance  of  the  Jewish  rites  and 
ceremonies,  would  appear  also  from 


436    THIS  DOCTRINE  DESTROYS  ALL  EXISTING  CHURCHES.    [lECT.  XVII. 

is  now  found  existing  upon  earth.  For  the  Romish,  the  Greek, 
the  Oriental,  the  AngHcan,  churches  are  all  separate  in  their 
ecclesiastical  government,  and  hence  they  would  all  be  inevit- 
ably excluded  by  this  rule  from  the  character  of  the  true  churches 
of  Christ. 

It  will  avail  nothing  to  say,  as  does  the  Romish  church,  that 
havino^  cast  out  schismatics  and  heretics,  she  is  united  wiih  herself. 
For  even  were  this  true,  which  is  most  contrary  to  truth,  as  it 
regards  either  the  Roman  or  the  Anglican  communions,  in  the 
bosom  of  which  there  are  innumerable  schisms  —  yet  were  this  a 
fact,  it  is  just  as  true  of  all  other  communions,  which  are  also 
united  with  themselves.  Nor  will  it  sustain  this  exclusive  as- 
sumption, for  these  churches,  or  either  of  them,  to  appropriate  to 
themselves,  the  title  and  the  privileges  of  the  catholic  church ; 
for  it  were  just  as  easy  for  any  other  denomination,  which  desired  to 
imitate  their  presumptive  arrogance,  to  make  a  similar  claim,  and 
thus  all  the  sects  in  Christendom  might,  each  in  turn,  become  the 
catholic  church. 

As  there  may  then  be  schism  where  there  is  true  doctrine 
and  a  true  church  ;^  so  may  there  be  great  professed  union, 
where  there  is  neither  true  faith  nor  true  charity,  and  where 
there  is  therefore  real  schism.  But  this,  surely,  is  not  the  unity 
Christ  enjoins,  which  is  unity  of  faith,  love  and  charity  ;  and 
this  all  churches,  which  hold  to  what  is  essential,  possess. 
The  church  of  Christ  is  one,  only  in  Christ,  only  by  the  appoint- 
ment and  determination  of  Christ,  and  only  as  governed  and 
directed  by  Him.  It  is  therefore  necessarily  and  essentially  one 
body,  nor  can  men  by  any  self-constructed  lines  or  barriers  divide 

the  fact  that  the  Jewish  christians  con-  Ch.  Ex.  p.  154,)  "upon   the  whole 

tinued  in  the  observance   of  their  pe-  earth,  that  did   profess  tiiis  true  faith, 

culiar    rites    until    after   the    time   of  that  alone  might  be  called  the  catholic 

Hadrian,  when  one  part  of  them  sepa-  church,  because   that  alone  had  that 

rated  from  the  rest,  and  threw  off  the  catholic  faith  which  did  properly  make 

cereinonial    law,  which  the  others  re-  and  constitute  the  true  church." 

tained.     See  Vidals  Mosheim,  vol.  ii.  TertuUian    says,   (Ayton,    p.    585, 

pp.  193,  201.  Tert.  de   Poescript.   Hreret   cap.  x.v.) 

When  almost  all  the  bishops  were  "And  so  TertuUian  speaks  to  the 
become  arian,  the  people  who  adhered  same  purpose,  when  he  gives  an  ac- 
unto  the  orthodox  faith,  sot  up  their  count  of  the  church's  unity,  as  con- 
private  conventicles  in  opposition  unto  sisting — 'In  her  adhering  to  that 
them,  as  for  instance  at  Constantino-  doctrine  which  was  first  preached  by 
pie,  Antioch,  Alexandria,  and  other  the  apostles,  who,  having  first  deliver- 
places.  And  who  will  say  tliese  were  ed  it  in  Judea,  and  planted  churches 
schismatics,  or  out  of  tlie  pale  of  the  there,  went  abroad  and  delivered  the 
true  cburcli,  though  beyond  the  line  same  to  other  nations,  and  settled 
of  apostolical  succession.  churches  in  cities,  from  whence  other 
I)  See  Dr.  Scott  in  Notes  of  the  churches  have  the  same  doctrine 
Ch.  Ex.  p.  203.  propagated  to  them,  which  are  there- 

"  If  there  were  but  one  particular  fore  called  apostolical  churches,  as  the 

church,  "  says   Dr.  Payne,  (Notes  of  offspring  of  those  which  were  found- 


LECT.  XVII.]  SCHISM  DOES  NOT  DESTROY  A  CHURCH.  437 

THE  CHURCH,  though  they  may  mark  out  the  limits  of  their  own 
branch  of  the  church.^ 

Let  us  pursue  ihis  idea  a  hltle  further.  Schism,  as  has  been 
shown,  means  division,  or  that  which  rends  asunder  a  body  pre- 
viously united.  But  if  that  which  is  essential  to  the  nature  of  the 
body  is  still  retained  by  each  party,  tlien  of  course,  neither  ceases 
to  retain  the  characteristic  quaHties  of  that  body.  But  if  one  part 
is  thrown  oft' by  the  other,  because  it  has  ceased  to  possess  the 
qualities  necessary  to  the  homogeneity  of  the  body,  and  to  its 
sound  and  healthy  condition  ;  then  will  that  portion  lose,  while  the 
other  retains,  the  character  of  the  body.  And  in  this  case,  the 
whole  fault  of  such  a  division  will  be  justly  imputable  to  the  cor- 
rupted member. 

But  we  may  further  suppose  the  body  of  the  church  to  be  di- 
vided on  questions,  which  do  not  affect  the  essential  being  of  the 
church,  but  only  its  well-being.  Now  in  this  case  there  must  be 
criminality  in  one  or  both  of  the  parties  so  dividing,  but  neither 
will  cease  to  be  true  churches,  since  both  retain  what  is  of  funda- 
mental importance.  That  only  can  destroy  the  being  of  a  church 
which  separates  it  from  Christ,  and  from  the  life-giving  influences 
of  his  Holy  Spirit ;  and  this  nothing  short  of  apostacy  from  the 
truth  can  do.  The  apostle  certainly  addresses  the  church  at 
Corinth  as  a  church  of  God,  in  the  very  epistle  in  which  he  so 
severely  rebukes  its  members  for  their  schisms.  He  still  regards 
them  as  a  true  church,  and  as  one  church  —  as  one  body  and 
as  one  family.  And  although  some  of  the  members  were  in  un- 
natural rebellion  against  the  others,  and  were  alienated  in  views 
and  feelings  from  the  rest,  so  that  they  could  not  act  or  worship 
together  5  yet  did  they  not,  on  that  account,  cease  to  be  one 
body,  though  divided,  or  one  family,  though  disunited.  The 
severance  of  the  bonds  of  amity  had  not  broken  the  inseparable 
bonds  of  spiritual  consanguinity.  They  did  not  cease  to  be 
children  of  the  same  parents,  and  brethren  and  sisters  of  the 
same  domestic  circle,  though  now  driven  asunder  by  the  force  of 

ed  by  them.     Therefore,  so  many  and  467;  see  Augustine  in  ibid,  p.  293  ; 

so   great  churches   are  all   that   one  Spiritual    Despotism,   p.    ]63,     «&c. ; 

prime   and    apostolical   church    from  Hind's  Rise  and  Progress  of  Christ, 

whence  all  others  come.     And  thus  vol.  ii.  p.  165. 

they  are  all  prime  and  apostoiical  in  "  There  has  been  a  time,"  says  Dr. 

regard  to  their  unity,  as  long  as  there  Claggett,  (Notes  of  the  Ch.  p.  178,) 

is  that  communication  of  that  title  of  "  when  it  was  so  far  from  being  a  note 

brotherhood   and    common    work    of  of  the  catholic  church  to  be  united  to 

peace  and  hospitality.'  "  the  pope,  that  it  was  impossible   so  to 

1)  See  Sherlock  in  Notes  of  the  be  without  separation  from  the  catho- 

Ch.  pp.  32,  33,  34.  lie  church." 

See   also  Oxf.  Tr.  vol.  i.  pp.  360,  See  Cyprian  and  others,  quoted  in 

368 ;  Chillingworth's  Wka.  vol.  i.  pp.  Potter  on  Ch.  Govt.  pp.  166, 167, 182 

108, 109  ;  Schism,  pp.  277,  278,  292,  and  183. 


338  THE    TRUE    DOCTRINE   ASSERTED.  [lECT.  XVII. 

party  strife  and  internal  discord.  Guilty  they  no  doubt  were  for 
being  thus  at  variance.  Guilty  were  they  who  first  wandered 
from  the  jDath  of  obedience  to  the  parental  law ;  and  they,  too, 
who  associated  with  the  disobedient  brethren,  in  this  contume- 
lious defiance  of  the  law  of  the  christian  family.  But  neverthe- 
less, they  were  still  children,  and  they  are  called  upon  by  the 
aposlle  to  return  to  the  exercise  of  the  filial  and  fraternal  spirit. 
And  just  so  is  it  at  this  moment  with  all  the  members  of  the 
great  christian  household.  They  have  most  evidently  fallen  out 
by  the  way,  and  are  not  found  walking  together  in  love  and  am- 
ity. And  most  surely  there  is  a  heavy  responsibility  resting  upon 
them,  who  by  their  neglect  of  the  divine  law  and  charter  of  the 
church,  or  by  the  wanton  assumption  of  undue  authority  over 
their  brethren  in  the  Lord,  have  led  to  the  present  alienations  of 
the  various  members  of  the  christian  family.  But  still,  wherever 
there  is  a  church  which  is  found  holding  to  the  head,  even  Christ, 
and  to  the  truth  as  it  is  in  Him;  —  there,  is  a  true  member  of 

the  CHURCH  CATHOLIC,  WHICH  IS  MADE  UP  OF  ALL  THE  PARTIC- 
ULAR CHURCHES  IN  WHATEVER  PART  OF  THE  WORLD  THET  ARE 
FOUND. 

Schism,  then,  is  not  separation,  noris  that  church  schismatical 
that  is  independent  in  its  organization  and  ecclesiastical  regi- 
men of  some  other,  which  is  vain  and  arbitrary  enough  to  claim 
jurisdiction  over  it.  Separation  may,  in  many  cases,  be  duty, 
and  the  source,  not  of  schism,  but  of  greater  unity.  Union 
may,  in  such  cases,  be  sinful,  and  the  fountain  whence  the  most 
bitter  waters  of  schism  may  be  found  to  flow.  There  is  noth- 
ing in  the  word  of  God  which  makes  such  consolidated  union 
necessary  to  christian  unity,  or  which  identifies  such  separate 
and  independent  organization  with  schism.  The  very  contrary 
is  there  established.  For,  while  the  apostolic  churches  formed 
no  actual  secessions,  they  were  yet  schismatical ;  and  while  in- 
dependent of  one  another,  they  dwelt  together  in  the  unity  of 
the  spirit,  and  the  bonds  of  peace  :  and  thus,  as  schism  may  be 
found  where  there  is  union  in  external  form  and  polity,  so  may 
unity  co-exist  with  separation  and  independence. 


ADDITIONAL    NOTES   TO   LECTURE    SEVENTEENTH. 


NOTE   A. 

THE     NECESSARY     TENDENCY    OF     PRELACY    TO    UNITY    BOTH    OF    SPIRIT    AND    OF 
ECCLESIASTICAL    ASSOCIATION. 

As  tliis  adaptation  of  prelacy  to  secure  union,  in  contrast  with  the  undenied 
differences  ainonor  other  denominations,  is  now  the  theme  of  daily  exultation, 
—  as  it  has  been  diirino;  its  entire  schism-making  course  —  we  feel  called  upon 
to  give  here  a  few  additional  illustrations  of  this  tendency. 

And  first,  we  will  present  a  portion  of  a  recent  letter,  published  by  Bishop 
Mclivaine,  together  with  the  introductory  remarks  of  the  editor  of  the  Epis- 
copal Recorder. 

Bishop  Mclivaine  and  the  Churchman. — Our  readers  may  be  grieved,  with 
ourselves,  to  see  and  know  the  necessity  for  such  communications  as  the  fol- 
lowing from  Bishop  Mclivaine.  We  are  sorry  to  have  our  paper  occupied 
with  evidences  of  such  a  slate  of  things  in  our  church  as  are  given  in  these 
letters.  The  unholy  and  violent  course  which  has  been  pursued  by  tiie 
Churchman,  and  we  are  bound  to  say  sanclioned,  because  unrestrained  and 
uncontradicted,  by  Bishop  Onderdonk,  has  given  pain  and  distress  to  many 
minds  who  are  deeply  concerned  for  the  peace  and  welfare  of  tlie  episcopal 
church.  We  do  not  feel  at  liberty  to  refuse  Bishop  Mclvaino  the  opportunity 
of  self-defence  in  our  columns,  after  he  has  been  so  unjustly  assailed.  But  we 
feel  called  upon  to  do  no  more  in  connexion  with  these  discussions  than  to 
express  our  solemn  conviction  of  the  destructive  and  guilty  character  and  ten- 
dency of  the  course  which  has  called  for  such  a  defence.  The  church  will 
see,  when  ruptured  and  riven  by  the  violence  of  this  party,  her  peace  destroy- 
ed, her  truth  overshadowed,  her  integrity  broken,  what  has  been  the  purpose 
of  these  movements  on  tlieir  part.  To  us  it  will  be  then,  as  it  is  now,  an 
abiding  comfort  that  we  labored  for  peace  and  truth,  and  the  responsibility 
of  the  result  may  rest,  where  it  belongs,  on  an  ultra  ■party,  who,  by  a  bold  and 
arbitrary  course  of  denunciation,  of  tlie  men  and  the  truth  of  God,  have  thrown 
a  peaceful  body  into  convulsions  and  schism. 

Bishop  Mclivaine  to  the  Editor  of  the  Churchman : 

I  ask  no  other  answer  to  your  charge  of  "  almost  heresy,"  tiian  that  those 
who  read  what  you  have  written,  will  also  read  what  I  have  written.  But 
why,  then,  am  I  so  pained  and  mortified  .-'  Is  it  because  such  treatment  and 
such  opposition  from  you  were  unexpected .''  Alas,  Dr.  Seabury,  1  have 
known  you  too  lonsr  and  too  well,  not  to  know  just  how  such  truth,  even 
what,  in  my  view,  is  no  other  tlian  "  the  glorious  gospel  of  the  blessed  God," 
"would  be  relished  by  you.  I  knew  you  would  utterly  despise,  detest,  and 
ridicule  it,  just  as  you  have  done.  And  I  have  no  idea  that  you  have  ex- 
pressed all  you  feel  with  regard  to  it.  Your  hatred  of  such  truth  is,  I  have 
no  doubt,  even  much  greater  than  you  have  expressed.  I  say  it  feelingly  and 
solemnly,  for  I  know  the  awfulness  of  such  a  state  of  mind.  And  if  1  suppo- 
sed you  would  deny  it,  were  it  not  that  I  suppose  you  wish  to  be  considered  as 


440  N0TE3    TO    LECTURE    XVII. 

in  that  state  of  mind,  I  would  not  thus  lay  it  to  your  charge.  But  as  long  as 
1  tlius  understand  the  views  and  tastes  which  you  avow,  let  me  tell  you  seri- 
ously. ni)t  in  the  spirit  of  severity,  that  until  there  shall  be  reason  to  suppose 
that  God  has  wrought  a  great,  and  wiiat  1  should  call  a  very  blessed  change, 
in  your  views  and  tastes  and  sympathies;  when  I  shall  publish  any  thing  dis- 
tinctive concerning  the  great  matters  of  tiie  gospel,  especially,  as  to  tcliat  a 
poor  sinner  must  do  to  be  saved,  I  shall  feel  much  more  confident  that  I  speak 
"  the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus,"  if  1  find  you  loathing  it,  as  you  do  my  charge, 
than  if  I  siiall  find  you  praising  it. 

You  recently  published  in  your  paper  of  November  7lh,  a  most  abusive  and 
abominable  attack  upon  me,  headed,  "  Oxfonl  Tracts,  Charity  E.vemplified." 
You  charged  me  with  having  refused  to  receive  a  person  as  a  candidate  for 
orders,  "  because  he  had  declined  joining  a  teetotal  society,  and  attending  ser- 
vices where  the  liturgy  was  dishonored."  When  I  requested  you  to  state  tiie 
grounds  on  which  you  published  such  statemt-nts,  (which,  by  the  way,  had  not 
one  least  approach  to  truth,)  you  declined  printing  my  letter  and  answering  its 
request  for  your  grounds  of  charge,  "  out  of  respect  "  (you  wrote  rne)  "  to  my 
office,  and  regard  to  the  honor  of  the  church,  and  because  you  did  not  want  to 
be  brought  into  such  conflict  with  your  superior,"  as  you  foresaw  would  be 
the  consequence.  My  dear  sir,  if  your  respect  to  my  office,  and  to  your  "  supe- 
rior," and  to  the  honor  of  the  church,  be  so  great,  how  great  then  must  be  your 
hatred  of  the  truth  contained  in  my  cliarge,  when  it  so  masters  that  respect 
and  so  casts  it  behind  your  back,  and  makes  you  treat  your  "  superior  "  as  you 
have  done  in  the  article  now  under  consideration  ! 

But  let  us  ask  again,  why  docs  your  treatment  so  pain  and  mortify  me  .'  I 
answer,  because  of  the  painful  consideration  thai  the  Churchman  is  so  widely 
regarded  as  representing  the  clergy  of  the  diocese  of  New  York,  and  especially 
because  it  is  "the  official  organ  of  the  Bishop  of  New  York,"  and  is  under  his 
avowed  "  general  direction  and  supervision,"  and  therefore,  where  it  calls  my 
charge  "  almost  heretical,"  it  is  the  Bishop  of  New  York  whom  the  Bishop  of 
Ohio  must  consider  as  thus  speaking;  and  when  it  ridicules  the  writing  of  the 
Bishop  of  Ohio  as  "mere  romance,"  "not  even  founded  on  fact,"  Vind  as  the 
work  of  a  writer  "  incompetent,"  and  as  containing  "a  perversion  of  historical 
truth,"  it  is  not  merely  Dr.  Seabury  who  is  responsible,  but  it  is  his  endorser, 
and  patron  and  director  and  supervisor,  his  protector  in  these  things  ;  it  is  the 
Bishop  of  New  York  ;  who  is  just  so  much  the  more  responsible  for  these  ex- 
pressions and  charges,  as  his  influence  in  giving  them  weight  is  greater;  and 
so  will  he  be  held  by  the  church  as  well  as  by  myself. 

But  here  I  must  say,  that  I  would  not  have  spoken  in  this  letter  touching 
the  responsibility  under  which  1  hold  the  Bishop  of  New  York  for  the  conduct 
of  the  Churchman  towards  me,  were  it  not  that  I  have  faithfully  and  respect- 
fully and  kindly  tried  in  vain  by  a  private  correspondence  to  obtain  froin  that 
bishop  some  satisfaction,  at  least  some  expression  of  regret  for  the  abominable 
attack  upon  my  official  proceedings,  in  the  case  of  the  candidate  above  referred 
to.  My  first  letter,  he  answered  by  declining  to  be  considered  as  responsible, 
in  the  way  1  held  him  to  be,  for  such  things  in  the  Churchman  ;  while  not  a 
word  has  lie  said,  to  indicate  that,  in  the  article  complained  of,  he  does  not  en- 
tirely concur.  My  second  letter  is,  to  this  day,  unanswered,  though  it  was 
written  nearly  two  months  ago.  However  you  may  have  meant  it,  when  you 
placed  me  in  company  with  Whitfield,  Wesley,  Kcwton,  Scott,  and  Simeon,  I  by 
no  means  decline  the  honor.  However  I  may  diflfer  from  any  of  them  in  sonje 
things,  I  love  and  honor  the  whole  group,  and  especially  Newton,  Scott,  and 
Simeon,  as  noble  "  soldiers  of  Jesus  Christ,"  and  God  forbid  that  1  should  not 
feel  honored  by  such  ridicule  as  places  me  at  their  side. 

Then,  as  to  the  charge,  which  you  so  much  reprobate  as  "  almost  heretical," 
I  trust  the  considerate  reader  will  not  accuse  me  of  egotism,  in  introducing  the 
following  extract  from  a  letter  lately  received  from  my  honored  friend,  the 
Rev.  G.  S.  t'aber ;  especially  as  his  authority  has  been  so  much  spoken  of 
lately  in  recommendation  of  his  work  on  Election,  and  as  you,  sir,  have  said, 
in  your  notice  of  my  book,  that  "  P'aber  would  not  thus  have  conducted  the 
argument."  Thus  he  writes  :  "  I  ought  before  to  have  acknowledged  your 
kind  remembrance  of  me,  in  the  shape  of  your  very  excellent,  and  unliappily 


NOTES    TO    LECTURE    XVII,  441 

very  seasonable  Charge  on  the  vitally  important  subject  of  justification.  In 
this  present  day  of  rebuke,  wlien  the  Oxford  tractarians  are  doing  ail  tliat  lies 
in  their  power  to  propagate  the  popish  view  of  justificiition,  which  among 
protestants  (as  you  remark,  Charge,  p.  153)  seems  to  have  been  first  advanced 
by  Jjauterwaid,  your  Cliarge  is  specialhj  seasonable,  and  you  will  quite  under- 
stand wljy  1  say  unhappily  seasonable.  You  have,  however,  faithfully  done 
your  duty,  and  1  in  an  inferior  grade  of  the  priesthood,  though  to  a  greater 
typogruphicai  extent,  have  endeavored  to  do  mine.  Among  other  popish  fan- 
cies, the  tract  school  now  maintain  sacramental  justification." 

So  much  for  the  difference  of  opinion  between  you  and  Mr.  Faber;  you 
calling  that  '■^almost  heretical,"  which  he  calls  very  excellent,  seasonable  and 
faithful.  Whose  opinion  I  prefer,  perhaps,  you  will  be  able  to  decide.  Your 
charge  against  me  of  perverting-  historical  truth,  and  of  hnving  made  the  "  mar- 
vellous "  assertion  that  Bishop  Bull  inoculated  so  many  of  the  best  divines  of 
the  English  and  American  churches,  down  to  Dehon  and  Hobart,  with  the 
views  of  Socinianism,  will  be  noticed  in  another  letter.  Meanwhile,  I  am 
yours,  truly.  C.  P.  McIlvaine. 

Gambicr,  March  6,  1641. 

Again,  the  Editors  of  the  Recorder  thus  speak:  — 

"  Trial  of  Principles.  —  We  have  been  often  struck  with  the  trial  which  is 
given  to  avowed  principles  when  they  come  in  collision  with  cherished  tempers. 
The  late  course  of  the  New  York  Churchman  has  given  illustrations  of  this, 
to  which  the  serious  attention  of  the  Church  should  be  directed.  We  have 
long  ceased  to  descend  into  any  personal  controversy  with  that  paper,  and  are 
quite  unmoved  by  any  of  its  frequent  assaults  upon  ourselves.  But  we  would 
call  attention  to  the  violent  attacks  it  has  of  late  made  upon  the  characters  of 
some  of  our  bishops,  as  strange  developements  indeed  of  a  course  which  af- 
fects peculiar  reverence  for  the  episcopal  office  and  dignity.  Its  assaults  up- 
on the  reputation  of  Bishop  McCoskry,  and  of  Bishop  McIlvaine,  and  partic- 
ularly its  late  attacks  upon  the  latter,  have  outraged  all  decency  among  gen- 
tlemen, as  much  as  all  courtesy  among  christians.  Will  the  church  sustain 
these  assaults  ?  Yet  this  paper  is  certified  to  be  conducted  under  the  immediate 
supervision  and  entire  approbation  of  the  bishop  of  New  York.  Does  he  au- 
thorize and  endorse  these  outrages  upon  the  characters  of  the  bishops  of  the 
church.''  We  feel  bound,  upon  such  an  occasion,  to  break  our  uniform  si- 
lence in  regard  to  that  paper,  and  to  enter  our  solemn  protest  against  a  course 
of  insult  which  is  found  only  there,  and  which  is  most  contradictory  to  the 
high  pretensions  which  are  there  made  to  principle  upon  this  subject.  We 
feel  under  no  obligation  to  defend  Bishop  McIlvaine  in  this  or  any  contingen- 
cy. He  can  defend  himself  Nor  do  we  believe,  that  "a  falcon  towering  in 
his  pride  of  height,"  will  "  by  a  mousing  owl,  be  hawked  at  and  killed." 
But  we  feel  bound,  as  ministers  and  editors,  to  protest  against  this  unparelleled 
course  of  violence,  on  the  part  of  those  who  assert  their  claim  to  a  better 
character  and  higher  perceptions  of  truth  than  others.  Is  it  so,  that  this  pro- 
fessed reverence  for  the  episcopal  office  among  the  class  who  sustain  the 
Churchman,  is  all  pretence  ?  Is  tliat  an  universal  fact,  which  we  heard  years 
since  from  the  mouth  of  a  venerable  bishop,  "  that  it  is  easier  to  govern  ten 
low-churchtnen,  than  one  high-churchman.'  "  Whether  it  be  so  as  a  rule  or 
not,  it  is  undoubted  that  no  paper  of  any  class,  even  from  the  Romanists, 
which  comes  to  our  office,  is  so  uniformly  marked  by  an  evident  carnal  temper 
and  the  want  of  all  regard  for  private  and  official  character,  as  the  New  York 
Churchman, —  while  none  makes  such  pretensions  to  be  a  standard,  to  which, 
upon  church  principles,  others  should  be  conformed.  Is  this  abusive  spirit  to 
be  allowed  .■*  Does  Bishop  Onderdonk  mean  to  justify,  shelter,  and  reward  it? 
We  protest  against  it,  personally  and  officially  ;  and  while  we  discuss  principles, 
and  are  willing  they  should  be  discussed  with  entire  liberty,  we  cliallenge  the 
production  of  an  abusive  or  disrespectful  expression  personally  applied,  and 
still  more  to  ])ersons  in  authority  in  the  church,  in  all  the  columns  of  the  pa- 
per conducted  by  ourselves.  For  the  dogmas  of  the  Churchman  we  feel  no 
concern.  But  let  the  church  look  to  the  spirit  and  temper  with  which  it  is 
conducted,  while  it  bears  upon  its  face  the  solemn  testimony  of  the  bishop  of 
New  York,  "  it  has,  as  it  richly  deserves,  my  full  and  undiminished  confidence." 

56 


442  NOTES    TO    LECTURE    IVII. 

"  I  ncpil  not  li'll  you,  my  dear  sir,"  says  the  author  of  '  Loiters  to  a  Frinnd 
concerning  the  New  Theoloo-y  of  Oxford,'  in  the  Episcopul  Recorder  for  May 
y,  1~40,  "  tliat  tlu'se  writings  have  proved  firebrands  in  the  cliiircli.  Where 
id  the  pence,  imanirnity,  and  cordial  cn-operation  of  wliich  we  boasted  two 
years  ago?  We  were  then  a  compact,  united  body,  animated  by  one  spirit, 
nioviii;;  onward  in  a  career  of  prosperity.  Hut  jjow  is  it  now  f"  One  ciiurcU 
periodical  arrayed  against  another,  one  ciergyman  looking  with  suspicion  up- 
on iiis  brother  ;  nay,  our  very  bisliops  tempted  to  mutual  distrust;  and  all  be- 
cause a  few  divines  in  a  foreign  university  have  changed  the  liabit  of  reclusea 
for  that  of  agitators,  and  persuaded  many  to  believe  that  we  have  been  all 
along  ignorant  of  the  true  doctrines  of  our  clmrch,  and  that  great  benefit  is  to 
be  dcriveti  from  substiluliug  for  tlie  creed,  articles  and  iiomilies,  some  as  yet 
undefined  and  intangible  test  of  orthodoxy  !  "  (See  for  March,  1841.) 

'•  I  do  and  will  uKmrn,  and  shall  continue  to  mourn,"  says  the  Rev.  Benja- 
min Allen,  in  his  Letter  to  Bishop  Hoi)art,  (Philad.,  1827,  p.  8,)  '*  youR  un- 
soundness AS  A  CHURCHMAN,"  (liis  Capitals.)  Again  :  "  your  doctrines  and  views 
of  polity  are  unsound  and  unscriptural,"  ifcc.  "  Are  you  to  propose  a  plan  to 
cut  up  the  canons  and  the  Psalter,  and  claim  the  utmost  veneration  for  our  lit- 
urgy—  to  introduce  Jacobite  notions  of  church  government,  and  claim  to  be 
no  schismatic  .'  "  (p.  3L) 

See  further  the  Second  Letter  to  Bishop  Hobart,  by  this  same  writer,  also 
published  at  Philadelphia,  1827,  page  70,  and  Letter  Third  in  the  Ciirislian 
Warrior. 

How  beautifully  —  as  a  poetic  vision  in  contrast  with  the  sad  realities  of  life 
—  d(jes  the  following  quotation  from  a  recent  picture  of  the  prelacy,  relieve  the 
horrors  of  such  existing  facts.  "  When  the  English  Church,"  says  the  author 
of "  The  Church  of  England  and  the  Church  in  America  Compared,"  (New 
York,  1811,  p  2G,)  "  we  say,  shall  find  time  and  inclination  to  note  the  prinii- 
tive  ecclesiastical  polity  of  the  church  in  America,  and  the  unquestionable 
blessing  that  has  attended  its  peaceful  exercise;  (he  church  character  it  has 
given  to  all  her  institutions  ;  the  growing  union  of  individual  efforts  in  her 
favor;  the  advancing  harjiony  of  doctrinal  views  among  her  mkmbers; 
the  comparative  greatness  of  her  missionary  results;  how  unitku  she  has 
stood  in  the  midst  of  surrounding  divisions;  how  PEACEFUL  in  the  n\idst  of 
dissensions;  how  ORTHODOX  in  the  midst  of  heresies;  how  tranquil  in  the 
midst  of  fanatical  excitement ;  how  energetic  in  spite  of  her  feebleness  ;  how 
concentrated  in  spite  of  dispersion  ;  how  faithful,  finally,  amid  nil  her  early 
trials,  and  now  at  last  how  solidly  prospering  and  how  surely  advancing." 

What  an  admirable  commentary,  also,  does  this  state  of  things  form  upon 
the  infallible  text  of  Mr.  Daubeny's  homily  on  schism.  "  Certain  it  is,  that 
union  among  christians  is  to  be  found  onl}'  within  the  walls  of  the  church. 
Upon  leaving  those  walls,  that  union  is  exchanged  for  endless  division,"  and 
so  on,  and  so  on.     (Guide  to  the  Ch.,  vol.  i.  p.  206,  disc,  x.) 

"  Such,"  says  Mr.  Staunton,  "  are  the  natural  results  of  schism;  having  no 
conservative  principles,  its  faith,  however  j)ure  at  first,  invakiabi.y  delerii'ratea 
and  proceeds,  step  by  step,  along  the  descent  of  error,  till  it  finally  settles  in 
the  depths  of  avowed  heresy."  (Dictionary  of  the  Church,  p.  418.) 

We  shall  have  occasion  to  recur  to  this  subject' when  we  come  to  illustrate 
theefficac}'  of  high-churchism  in  producing  sects. 

NOTE  B. 

THE    NATURE    OF    SCHISM. 

We  will  here  add  some  additional  authorities. 

Schism,  as  thus  described  in  scripture,  and  as  referring  to  one  particular 
church  or  comniuiiioii.  implies,  says  Dr.  Owen,  these  thrte  things:  (Works, 
vol.  XX.  p.  240.)  •'  1.  Want  of  that  mutual  lr)ve,  condescension,  and  forbear- 
ance, which  are  required  in  all  the  members  of  the  same  church,  with  the  moral 
evils  of  whisperings,  back-bitings,  and  evil  surmises,  that  ensue  thereon. 

"  2.  All  undue  adherence  unto  some  church  offices  above  others,  causing 
disputes  and  janglings. 


NOTES    TO   LECTURE    IVII.  443 

"  3.  Disorder  in  the  attendance  unto  the  duties  of  church  assemblies,  and  tha 
worship  of  God  performed  in  them.  This  is  the  only  notion  of  schism,  that  is 
exemplified  in  tlie  scripture,  the  only  evil  that  is  condemned  under  that  name." 

Jn  order,  then,  that  any  person  may  fall  into  this  guilt  of  schism,  "  it  is  re- 
quired," says  Dr.  Owen,  (Works,  vol   xi.ic.  p.  133,) 

"  1.  That  they  be  members  of,  or  belong  to,  some  one  chnrcli,  which  is  so 
by  the  institution  anJ  appointment  of  Jesus  Christ  And  we  shall  see  that 
there  is  more  required  hereunto  than  the  bare  being  a  believer  or  a  christian. 

"  iJ.  That  they  either  raise,  or  entertain,  and  persist  in  causeless  differences 
with  others  of  that  church  more  or  less,  to  the  interruption  of  that  exercise  of 
love  in  all  the  fruits  of  it,  which  ought  to  be  amongst  them  ;  and  the  disturb- 
ance of  the  due  performance  of  the  duties  required  of  the  church,  in  the  wor- 
ship of  God.  As  Clement,  in  the  foremcntioned  epistle,  <f>/Aovwo/  to-Ti  ai'tK^n 
Ksu  ^)tXa."rxi  TTigi  fjt.)\  at.vy.KOVTwv  tii  iranypt^t.v . 

"  3.  That  these  differences  be  occasioned  by,  and  do  belong  to,  some  things  in 
a  remoter  or  nearer  distance  appertaining  to  the  worship  of  God  :  their  ditfer- 
ences  on  a  civil  account  are  elsewhere  mentioned  and  reproved,  1  Epist.,chap. 
6,  for  therein,  also,  there  was  from  the  then  state  of  things,  an  «TT«,wa,  verse  7. 

"  Unless  men  can  prove,"  says  Dr.  Owen,  (Works,  vol.  xix.  p.  161 ,)  "  that  we 
have  not  the  Spirit  of  God,  that  we  do  not  savingly  believe  in  Jesus  Christ, 
that  we  do  not  sincerely  love  all  the  saints,  his  whole  body, and  every  member 
of  it,  they  cannot  disprove  our  interest  in  the  catholic  church." 

"  We  do  and  shall  abide  by  this  principle,"  says  Dr.  Owen,  in  his  Answer  to 
Dr.  Slillingfleet,  on  the  Unreasonableness  of  Separation,  (Works,  vol.  xx. 
p.  253,)  "  that  communion  in  faith  and  love,  with  the  administration  of  the 
same  sacraments,  is  sufficient  to  preserve  all  christians  from  the  guilt  of  schism, 
although  they  cannot  communicate  together  in  some  rites  and  rules  of  worship 
and  order." 

"  In  this  case,  I  ask,"  says  Dr.  Owen,  (Works,  vol.  xix.  p.  245,)  "  whether  it 
be  schism,  or  no,  for  any  number  of  men  to  reform  themselves,  by  reducing  the 
practice  of  worship  to  its  original  institution,  though  they  may  be  the  mmor 
part  lying  within  the  parochial  precinct ;  or  for  any  of  them  to  join  themselves 
with  others,  for  that  end  and  purpose,  not  living  within  those  precincts  .'  I 
shall  boldly  say  this  schism  is  commanded  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  (I  Tim.  vi.  5  ; 
2Tim.  iii.  5  ;  Hos.  iv.  15)." 

"  After  these  things,"  says  Dr.  Owen,  (Wks.  vol.  xix,  pp.  243,  249,)  "  The 
motion  of  schism  began  to  be  managed  variously,  according  unto  the  interest 
of  them  who  seemed  to  have  the  most  advantage  in  the  application  of  it,  unto 
those  who  dissented  from  them.  It  were  an  endless  thing  to  express  the  rise 
and  declare  the  progress  of  these  apprehensions.  But  alter  many  loose  and 
declamatory  discourses  about  it,  they  are  generally  issued  in  two  heads.  The 
first  is,  that  any  kind  of  dissent  from  the  pope  and  church  of  Rome  is  schism, 
all  the  schism  that  is  or  can  be  in  the  world.  The  other  is,  that  a  causeless 
separation  from  a  true  cliurch,  is  schism,  and  this  only  is  so.  But  whereas,  in 
this  pretended  definition,  there  is  no  mention  of  any  of  its  internal  causes,  nor 
of  its  formal  reason,  but  a  bare  description  of  it  by  an  outward  efl^ect,  it  serves 
only  for  a  weapon,  in  every  man's  hand  ;  to  perpetuate  digladiations  about  it. 
For  every  church  esteems  itself  true,  and  every  one  that  separates  himself — 
esteems  himself  to  have  just  cause  so  to  do. 

"  In  the  following  times,  especially  after  the  rise  and  prevalency  of  the  Arian 
heresy,  it  was  ordinary  for  those  of  the  orthodox  persuasion,  to  forsake  the 
communion  of  those  churches  wherein  Arian  bisiiops  did  preside,  and  to  gath- 
er themselves  into  separate  meetings,  or  conventicles  for  divine  worship,  for 
which  they  were  accused  of  schism,  and  in  sundry  places,  punished  accord- 
ingly;  yea,  some  of  them  unto  the  loss  of  their  lives.  Yet,  I  suppose  there 
are  none  now  who  judged  them  to  have  been  schismatics." 

"  But  after  that,  churches  began  to  depart  from  this  original  constitution,  by 
the  ways  and  means  before  declared  ;  every  alteration  produced  a  new  suppo- 
sition of  churcli-unity  and  peace,  whereto  every  church  of  a  new  constitution 
laid  claim;  new  sorts  of  schism  were  also  coined  and  framed." 

According  to  Matthew  Henry,  in  his  very  rare  "  Incjuiry  into  the  Nature  of 
Schism,"  the  word  denotes  in  the  New  Testament,  (Lond.  1717,  pp.  8,10,13, 


444  NOTES   TO    LECTURE    XVII, 

14,  15,)  "  a  division  in  apprehension  ;  so  <ryj<TixA  is  used.  In  which  place  it 
signifies  the  different  thoughts  and  apprehensions,  that  the  people  or  their  ru- 
lers had  concerning  Clirist,  some  thinking  well  of  him,  others   not.     Some 

accusing  him,  others  excusing  him A  division  in  affection ;  and  in 

this  sense  it  is  used  three  times  in  the  first  epistle  to  the   Corinthians,  and  no 

where  else  in  all  the  New  Testament." "By  this  instance,  (1  Cor.  3,) 

it  ap))ears,  that  narrow-spiritedness  which  confines  religion  and  the  church  to 
our  way  and  party,  whatever  it  is,  to  the  condemning  of  others  that  differ  from 
us  in  little  things,  is  the  great  schismaticating  principle,  which  hath  been  so 
much  the  bane  of  the  christian  church,  hinc  Mae  lacrymae."  "  We  find  the 
word  used,  f  hear  there  be  a-^iT/unTit  divisions  among  you.  (1  Cor.  2,  18.)  But 
the  schisms  were  quarrels  and  contentions  about  some  little  things  relating  to 
the  circumstances  of  public  worship,  and  the  quarrel  seems  to  have  been  about 
the  time  of  beginning  their  worship,  especially  when  they  were  to  join  in  the 
Lord's  supper,  or  their  love-feasts,  it  seems  they  did  not  come  exactly  at  the 
time,  therefore  the  apostle  bids  them  tarry  one  for  another."  (v.  33.) 

"  That  is  schism,  which  breaks  or  slackens  the  bond  by  which  the  members 
are  knit  together." 

"  Now  that  bond  is  not  an  act  of  uniformity,  in  point  of  communion,  in  the 
same  modes  and  ceremonies,  but  true  love  and  charity,  in  point  of  affection. 
'Tis  charity  that  is  the  bo7id  of  perfectness.  'Tis  the  vnity  of  the  spirit,  that  is 
the  bond  of  peace.     And  schism  is  that  which  breaks  this  bond. 

"  Now  from  all  this  laid  together,  I  draw  out  this  description  of  schism,  which 
according  to  my  present  apprehensions  is  the  true  scripture  notion  of  it." 

"Schism  is  an  uncharitable  distance,  division,  or  alienation  of  affections, 
among  those  who  are  called  christians,  and  agree  in  the  fundamentals  of  relig- 
ion, occasioned  by  their  different  apprehensions  about  little  things." 

See  this  view  of  schism  confirmed,  in  Dick's  Theol.  lect.  xcvii.  vol.  4,  p. 
314,  Engl.  ed.  Campbell  on  the  Gospels,  Prel.  Diss.  ix.  p.  3.  Edw.  Polhill, 
Esq.  on  Schism.  Brook's  Dissent.  Fully  Justified.  See  a  full  discussion  of 
the  subject  of  Schism,  in  Baxter's  True  and  Only  Way  of  Concord,  Lond. 
1681,  part  iii.  ch.  i. 


LECTURE    XVIIL 


THE     PRELATICAL     DOCTRINE     OF     APOSTOLICAL     SUCCESSION 
SCHISMATICAL. 

THE    SUBJECT    CONTINUED,   AND    THE    PRESBYTERIAN    CHURCH    VINDICATED 
FROM    THE    CHARGE    OF    SCHISM. 

We  have,  in  our  previous  discourse,  entered  upon  the  consid- 
eration of  the  schismatical  character  and  tendency  of  the  pre- 
latic  doctrine  of  apostoUcal  succession.  The  guiU  of  schism,  as 
we  have  there  shown,  has  been  imputed  by  the  Romish  church, 
to  the  Enghsh  ;  by  the  Enghsh  to  the  Romish  ;  and  by  the  va- 
riant parties  within  the  Anghcan  church,  to  one  another  ;  while 
all  these  vie  with  each  other  in  magnifying  the  heinousness  of 
its  criminality.  We  therefore  instituted  an  inquiry  into  the 
scripture  doctrine  of  the  unity  of  the  church,  and  of  schism, 
which  is  a  breach  of  that  unity. 

The  only  unity  which  can  be  scripturally  attributed  to  the 
church  of  Christ,  is  that  unity  which  has  reference  to  its  one 
common  and  divine  head,  —  to  that  one  faith  upon  which,  as  a 
foundation,  it  must  every  where  and  alike  rest;  —  to  those 
means  of  grace  which  are  the  efficacious  fountains  of  spiritual 
blessing,  wheresoever  the  Spirit  of  God  deigns  to  move  upon 
the  waters,  and  to  communicate  to  them  a  divine  energy;  — 
and  to  that  common  brotherhood,  by  which  all  who  are  born  of 
the  same  regenerating  spirit,  are  constituted  members  of  the 
same  heavenly  family,  and  heirs  to  the  same  everlasting  inheri- 
tance of  glory.  The  unity  of  the  christian  church  is  not,  there- 
fore, to  be  vainly  sought  —  in  carnal  and  Pharisaic  blindness  — 
in  any  uniformity  of  rites,  forms,  orders,  or  ceremonies,  which 
may  all  of  them  be  found  to  be  no  more  than  the  outward  gar- 


446  THE  SCRIPTURE  VIEW  OF  UNITY  AND  SCHISM.    [lECT.  XVIII. 

nishing  of  a  vvbited  sepulchre,  from  which  the  living  spirit  of 
true  Christianity  has  fled  for  ever.  Neither  is  this  unity  to  be 
looked  for  in  any  universal  subjection  to  the  dominion  of  any 
earthly  head,  or  of  any  ecclesiastical  polity  ;  which  would  be, 
on  the  one  hand  slavery,  and  on  the  oilier,  despotism.  —  The 
mere  fact,  then,  of  variety  in  rites,  or  forms,  —  or  of  separale- 
ness  and  independence,  as  it  regards  ecclesiastical  regimen, — 
no  more  establishes  ihe  absence  ofchrisiian  unity,  than  the  vari- 
ety in  human  forms,  or  human  societies,  proves  ihe  existence  of 
different  orders  of  human  beings,  or  disproves  the  certainty  of 
one  common  and  universal  parentage  —  one  universal  humanity. 

So  likewise  schism,  as  it  is  described  in  the  word  of  God,  lias 
reference  to  this  christian  unity  in  faith,  hope,  and  charity.  As 
it  is  there  developed,  it  existed  only  in  a  single  church  ; — and 
it  was  manifested  while  as  yet  no  separation  among  the  mem- 
bers of  that  church  had  taken  place.  The  Corinthian  schism 
consisted  not  in  insubordination  to  any  prelalic  hierarchy,  but  in 
the  Indulgence  of  uncharitable  and  bitter  feelings,  among  the 
members  of  that  church,  one  toward  another.  Whatever, 
therefore,  would  disturb  the  harmony  of  christian  communion  ; — 
whatever  would  alienate  the  minds  of  one  portion  of  the  chris- 
tian family  from  any,  or  every  other;  —  whatever  would  tend 
to  elevate  and  dignify  one  sect  or  denomination  above  the  rest, 
as  the  special  favorites  of  Heaven,  or  the  entailed  possessors  of 
Heaven's  peculiar  grace;  —  whatever  would  exalt  unessential 
points  into  essential  articles  of  faith,  and  thus  impose  burdens 
on  the  consciences  of  men;  —  whatever  would,  in  this  way, 
erect  new  terms  of  christian  communion;  —  whatever,  in  short, 
would  necessitate  opposition,  and  resistance,  and  separation,  on 
the  part  of  those  who  preferred  the  faith  and  order  of  the  gos- 
pel, to  the  wisdom,  or  policy,  or  traditions  of  men  ; — that  does 
the  word  of  God  also  teach  us  to  regard  as  schlsmatical. 

This  was  that  evil  reprobated  by  the  apostle  Paul,  and  which, 
like  an  intestine  feud,  was  wasting  the  energies  of  the  Corin- 
thian clunch.  This  was  the  evil  so  earnestly  rebuked,  in  these 
same  Corinthians,  by  the  apostolic  father  Clement,  in  his  epis- 
tles to  them.  The  schism  of  which  later  fathers  so  bombasti- 
cally treat,  and  whose  criminality  they  make  so  deep,  as  to  be 
actually  inexpiable  ;  —  that  Is,  resistance  to  the  authority  of  ec- 
clesiasiical  rulers,  or  rejection  of  the  assumed  dominion  of  a 
hierarchical  order:  —  concerning  this  schism  —  as  it  is  called  — 
the  scriptures  are  silent.  They  know  it  not.  It  is  a  fiction  of 
later  times.  It  is  an  evident  consequence  of  premises,  which 
had  been  laid  down,  In  the  gradual  introduction  of  the  prelatic 
system.     It  is  the  fatal  germ  of  that  spirit  of  priestcraft,  which 


LECT.  XVIII.]  PRELATISTS    6CHISMATICAL.  447 

has  wormed  its  way  into  the  church  ;  — corroded  its  vitals  ;  — 
and  carried  blight  and  mildew,  to  its  fairest  and  most  flourishing 
branches.  It  is,  then,  of  transcendent  imjDortance,  that  correct 
views  of  a  doctrine  which  has  been  employed  as  the  fulcrum  for 
supporting  every  engine  of  oppression,  should  be  well  estab- 
lished ;  that  a  timely  resistance  may  be  given  to  any  efforts 
for  the  re-establishment  of  a  spiritual  despotism,  to  which  our 
children  may  be  bound  in  unescapable  bondage. 

Two  questions,  therefore,  arise  from  this  discussion  :  first,  are 
we  schismatics  ?  and,  secondly,  are  the  abettors  of  this  prelatic 
theory  of  apostolical  succession  schismatical  ?  The  first  ques- 
tion we  answer  in  the  negative ;  and  the  second  in  the  affirma- 
tive. The  charge  of  schism  does  not,  we  affirm,  lie  against  us. 
It  does  attach  itself,  so  far  forth  as  it  is  carried  out,  to  the  advo- 
cates of  this  prelatic  system. 

That  we  we  are  schismatical,  prelatists  constantly  declare,  in 
language  the  most  severe,  bigoted,  and  illiberal.  Nor  are  such 
uncharitable  and  absurd  pretensions  to  an  exclusive  possession  of 
all  the  privileges  and  blessings  of  the  church  of  Christ,  confined  to 
foreign  divines  ;  they  are  adopted  by  many  in  this  country,  and  are 
daily  becoming  more  current.  In  addition  to  the  evidence  of 
this  fact  already  produced,  we  may  add,  that  Dr.  Chapman  has 
issued  a  volume  containing  twenty-seven  "  Sermons  to  Presby- 
terians of  all  Sects ; '"  "  the  object  of  which,"  as  he  defines  it 
in  his  preface,  '•  is  to  show  the  obligation  of  all  believers  in 
Christianity,  to  renounce  the  way  of  schism,  and  attach  ihem- 
selves  to  the  apostolic  church  of  Christ."^ 

1)  Hartford,  1636,  p.  384.  The    Charleston   Gospel    Messencrer, 

2)  The  terms  schism,  dissent,  for  February  1839,  mnkes  the  follow- 
sect,  and  their  correllates,  are  as  free-  ing  statement :  "Episcopalians  gen- 
ly  and  dogmatically  set  forth  as  they  erally  hold,  that  the  doctrine  of  a 
were  by  the  great  ancestor  of  tliis  high  ministry,  of  tliree  orders,  derixinfr  its 
church  party,  Archbishop  Laud,  who,  minislry  by  succession,  from  the  divine 
in  his  Letter  to  Bishop  Hall,  (see  head  of  the  church,  is  a  vital  truth 
in  Ayton's  Const,   of  Prim.  Ch.  app.  of  the  gospel."     (See  p.  384.) 

p.  2,)  thus  writes  ;  "  Since  they  chal-  "  Again,  in  the  same  work  for  May, 
lenged  the  presbyterian  faction  to  be  1839,  p.  80,  in  an  article  headed  Ox- 
Christ's  kingdom,  as  yourself  ex-  ford  Tracts,  No.  \.  it  is  declared  : 
presseth  it,  we  must  not  use  any  '♦  For  ourselves,  we  have  read  four 
mincing  terms,  but  unmask  them.  volumes,  save  those  parts  which  con- 
Nor  shall  I  ever  give  way  to  hamper  tain  Professor  Pusey's  Treatise  on 
ourselves  for  fear  of  speaking  plain  Baptism ;  and  of  these  alone  we  can 
truth,  though  it  be  against  Amsterdam  pretend  to  speak.  What  the  separate 
and  Geneva."  publications  of  their  authors  may 
Now  that  theso  views  are  not  contain,  or  what  errors  there  may  be 
views  pertinent  to  foreign  divines  or  in  Froude'sReniainp,  we  are  of  course 
churches  TTiere/j/,  nor  yet  to  other  por-  unable  to  say  ;  but  the  general  prin- 
lions  of  our  own  country  merely,  but  ciplcs  found  in  these  portions  we  have 
are  also  hdd  and  cherished  in  Charles-  examined,  appear  to  us  to  be  sound." 
ton,  is  a  fact  too  susceptible  of  proof.  Again,   in  an  elaborate   article   in 


448 


PRESBYTERIANS  BRANDED  AS  SCHISMATICS.       [lECT.  XVIII. 


Seeing,  then,  that  this  crime,  involving,  as  is  alleged,  such 
fearful  criminality,  is  thus  publicly  laid  to  our  charge ;  and  the 
effort  is  now  being  made  to  fasten  it  upon  us,  —  like  the  mark 


the  N.  Y.  Review,  for  July  1839,  on 
the  Oxford  Tracts,  known  to  be  writ- 
ten by  a  clerijyman  of  Ciiarleston, 
the  same  sentiments  are  more  exphc- 
itiy  advanced.  "  It  next  becomes  an 
important  question  to  determine  who 
has  aulliority  to  administer  them,  i.e. 
the  ordinances  .'  From  whom  is  this 
authority  derived  .'  And  liow  can  any 
one  be  assured,  that  he  is  not  intrud- 
ing himself,  uncalled,  and  without  the 
divine  approbation,  into  the  sacred 
office .'  If  the  Holy  Ghost  be  com- 
municated in  these  ordinances  of  re- 
ligion, who  has  power  over  the  gift  ? 
Such,  then,  being  the  sense  of  the 
Tracts,  and  we  may  add  of  the  whole 
church,  for  though  she  does  not  in 
express  terms  condemn  tiie  various 
sects  around  her,   yet    she    allows 

NONE  TO  BE    MINISTERS  WHO   ARE    NOT 

EPiscoPALLv  ORDAINED,  and  tells  US 
only  that  Christ  has  promised  to  be 
with  the  ministers  of  THE  apostolic 
SUCCESSION  to  the  end  of  the  world, 

thus  TACITLV  DISOWNINO  all  OTHERS, 

—  they  cannot  acknowledge  any  ec- 
clesiastical    CONFRATERNITY     with 

the  dissenting  parties,  because  these 
divisions  are  unable  to  make  out  their 
genealogy,  or  trace  their  origin.  Ac- 
cording to  their  own  principles,  in- 
deed, they  are  many  of  them  excluded 
from  all  claim  to  recognition,  as  hav- 
ing an  authorized  ministry,"  &c. 

"  But  their  posterity  soon  departed 
from  these  rules  ;  for  in  many  cases, 
the  minister  was  appointed  by  the 
congregation  alone  ;  again,  they  went 
of  their  own  accord  ;  sometimes  they 
received  a  pretended  ordination  from 
those  who  had  no  anthoiity  to  confer 
it;  and  altogether  their  proceedings 
have  been  so  confused  and  irregular, 
that  none  of  them  can  with  certainty 
claim  even  authority  of  presbyterian 
orders.  For,  though  they  have  for 
the  most  part  ceased  from  these  wild 
and  irregular  proceedings,  yet  as  the 
stream  can  never  rise  higher  than  the 
fountain,  so  they  are  just  where  their 
forefathers  were.  Tlicy  may  have  ivhat 
are  called  pious  exercises  of  the  mind, 
but  so  had  the  dairyman's  daughter. 
They  may  be  learned  ;  so  was  Sir 
Matthew  Il.ile ;  eloquent,  but  not 
more    so  than   Pitt  or  Burke.     They 


may  be  laboring  to  do  good,  so  did 
William  Wilberforce.  But  as  these 
were  not  viinisters  of  God,  invested 
with  power  to  baptize  and  dispcTiser ii'E 

BODY  AND   BLOOD   OF    ClIRIST    TO    THE 

PEOPLE,  no  moreare  those,  of  whom  we 
have  spoken.  There  is  not  any  more  of 
biffotry  or  uncharitableness  in  de- 
nying THIS  RIGHT  TO  THE  ONE  CLASS, 
THAN  THERE  IS  IN  DENYING  IT  TO  THE 

OTHER.  This  is  the  sense  of  the 
Tracts  on  the  Apostolic  Succession; 
and  in  this  they  are  supported  by  the 
wisest  and  best  minds  of  the  English 
Church."     See  ibid,  for  May,  1841. 

Dr.  How  represents  Dr.  Miller  as 
"  separating  from  that  divinely  insti- 
tuted ministry,  (the  prelacy,)  which, 
from  the  apostolic  age,  has  been  con- 
sidered an  essential  ingredient  of  the 
church  of  Christ,  and  thus  plunging 
into  the  sin  of  schism."  Vind.  p. 
130. 

The  Rev.  James  Wctmore,  in  his 
vindication  of  the  professors  of  the 
Churcli  of  England  in  Connecticut, 
published  in  Boston,  in  1747,  at  a 
time,  too,  when,  in  comparison  with 
the  other  part  of  the  population,  they 
constituted  but  a  handful,  writes  thus  : 
(Hodge's  Hist.  pt.  ii.  pp.  460,474.) 
"  In  reference  to  the  charge  of  schism, 
wliich  had  been  brought  against  the 
episcopal  proselytes  in  Connecticut, 
he  says,  '  If  the  congregations,  the 
forsaking  of  which  is  called  schism, 
be  themselves  founded  in  schism, 
and  unjustifiable  separation  from  the 
communion  of  the  Ch.  of  England  ;  or 
in  their  present  constitution,  must  ne- 
cessarily be  esteemed  abettors  and  ap- 
provers of  schism,  disorders,  usurpa- 
tion, contempt  of  the  chief  authority 
Christ  has  loft  in  his  church, or  any  such 
like  crimes,  then  such  congregations, 
whatever  they  may  call  themselves, 
and  whatever  show  they  may  make  of 
piety  and  devotion  in  their  own  ways, 
ought  to  be  esteemed  in  respect  of  the 
mystical  body  of  Christ,  only  as  ex- 
crescences or  tumors  in  the  body  nat- 
ural, or  perhaps  as  fungosities  in  an 
ulcerated  tumor,  the  eating  away  of 
which  by  whatever  means,  tends  not 
to  the  hurt,  but  to  the  soundness  and 
health  of  the  body." 

"  The  claims  and  conduct  of  these 


LECT.  XVIII.]    OUR  LORD  AND  HIS  APOSTLES  CALLED  SCHISMATICS.     449 

upon  the  murderous  Cain  —  that  wherever  we  are  found  we 
may  bear  the  undeniable  evidence  of  our  heaven-daring  offence  ; 
it  is  surely  important,  reasonable  and  proper,  that  we  should 
vindicate  ourselves,  and  our  protestant  brethren,  from  such 
ungenerous  and  unchristian  policy. 

Let  it  then  be  observed,  that  the  mere  fact  that  presbyterians 
have  been  charged  with  the  guilt  of  schism,  is  no  proof  that  they 
have  really  deserved  the  imputation.  For  the  same  allegation 
was  made  by  the  Jews  against  our  blessed  Saviour ;  (Mark  vii. 
1,  &tc.,)  and  also  against  his  apostles,  and  the  first  christians 
generally,  who  were  denominated  the  sect  of  the  Nazarenes, 
(Acts  xxiv.  5.)  Nor  was  the  apostle  Paul  ashamed  to  acknowl- 
edge, that,  after  the  way  which  was  called  heresy  — that  is,  sect 
or  schism  —  so  he  worshipped  the  God  of  his  fathers,  (Acts 
xxiv.  14.)  On  the  contrary,  this  same  apostle,  on  another 
occasion,  openly  declares,  that,  after  the  most  straitest  sect  —  or 
heresy  or  schism  —  of  his  religion,  he  lived  a  pharisee.  (Acts 
xxvi.  5.) 

Neither  is  the  fact,  that  as,  compared  with  the  Romish  and 
other  prelatic  churches,  we  are  in  a  minority,  a  reasonable  or 
sufficient  ground  for  imputing  to  us  the  guilt  of  schism.  For  if 
we  will  exclude  from  our  consideration,  as  even  the  Anglican 
church  must,  —  the  Romish  church,  which,  since  the  Council  of 
Trent,  has  authoritatively  renounced  the  character- 
istic DOCTRINES  of  THE  GOSPEL,  AND  BASED  ITSELF  UPON 
A  NEW  CREED,  WHICH  IS  LITTLE  MORE  THAN  AN  ANATHEMA 
AND     A     CURSE,    UPON    ALL    WHO    MAINTAIN    THE    TRUTH    AS    IT 

IS  IN  JESUS  ;  and  also  the  Greek  church,  which  is  pledged  to 
doctrines  equally  antichristian ;  and  if  we  will  direct  our  atten- 
tion, especially,  to  the  churches  of  the  reformation,  then  will 
we  be  found  associated  in  all  essential  principles  of  ecclesiasti- 
cal polity,  WITH  AN  OVERWHELMING  MAJORITY  OF  THE  TRU- 
EST AND  PUREST  CHURCHES  OF  CHRIST.  Besidcs,  if  the  mere 
fact  of  being  in  a  minority,  is  to  exclude  us  from  the  pale  of 
Christianity,  then  will  the  Anglican  church  be  itself  rejected  by 
the  Romish ;  true  christians  will  be  out-voted  by  the  world ; 
and  Christianity  itself  will  be  convicted  of  schism  by  the  over- 
whelming masses  of  paganism.  The  true  church  of  Christ  is 
not  to  be  sought  by  numbers,  but  by  the  purity  of  its  faith. 
"  For,"  to  use  the  words  of  Bishop  Sherlock,  "  if  three  parts 
in  four,  of  all  the  churches  in  the  world,  were  very  corrupt  and 

missionaries,  in  many  cases  greatly  in-  state  to  be  in  comnmnion  with  the  Ch. 

creased  this  irritation.   They  spokt;  of  of  England;  as  having  no  authorized 

all  the  inhabitants  of  the  town  in  which  ministers  or  valid  ordinances;  as  be- 

they  lived,  as  their  parishioners;  as  longing  to  churches  whicli  were  mere 

bound  both  by  the  law  of  God  and  the  excrescences  or  fungosities." 

57 


450        OPINIONS    OF    SHERLOCK,    LAUD,    AND    DODWELL.       [lECT.  XVIII. 

degenerate  in  faith  and  worship,  and  were  in  one  commun- 
ion, this  would  be  the  most  catholic  communion,  as  catholic  siti,- 
nifies  the  most  general  and  universal  ;  but  yet  the  fourth  part, 
which  is  sincere,  would  be  the  best  and  truest  church,  and  the 
catholic  church,  as  that  signifies  the  communion  of  all  orthodox 
and  pure  churches."' 

So  also  Archbishop  Bancroft,  after  stating  "  that  that  church," 
wherever  it  be,  "  which  maintainetb,  without  error,  the  faith  of 
Christ,"  &;c.,  adds  "  from  which  church  whosoever  doth  separ- 
ate himself,  he  is  to  be  reckoned  a  schismatic  or  a  heretic."'' 

Neither  will  this  conclusion,  that  we  are  schisrnatical,  follow 
from  the  additional  fact,  that,  as  a  christian  denomination,  we 
are  ecclesiastically  independent,  and  separate  from  other  com- 
munions of  the  church  catholic. 

This  will  be  made,  we  trust,  indubitably  certain,  in  the  dis- 
cussion of  the  true  succession.^  In  order,  then,  to  establish 
against  us  the  charge  of  schism,  one  of  two  things  must  be  made 
clear.  Either  that  we  have  introduced  into  the  church,  and 
insisted  on  retaining,  corruptions  in  doctrine,  worship,  or  gov- 
ernment ;  or  that  we  have  made  essential,  as  a  term  of  commun- 
ion with  the  church  catholic,  that  which  Christ  and  his  apostles 
never  did  make  fundamental,  or  an  article  of  the  faith. 

It  will  not  surely  be  pretended  that  we  are  bound  to  maintain 
and  perpetuate  corruptions,  in  doctrine  or  worship,  for  the  sake 
of  living  in  external,  visible  union,  with  any  church,  by  which 
such  corruptions  are  resolutely  upheld.  For,  since  the  church 
is  founded  upon  the  truth,  and  receives  its  being  from  its  divine 
institution;  whenever  that  institution  is  set  aside  —  and  just  so 
far  as  it  is  set  aside  —  the  character  of  the  church  is  destroyed  ; 
and  they  who  still  sacredly  regard  its  welfare,  and  the  authority 
of  its  divine  Founder,  must  combine  their  energies  for  the  sup- 
port of  His  institutes,  and  for  the  overthrow  of  such  innova- 
tions. The  guilt,  therefore,  of  that  separation  from  visible  and 
external  communion,  which  such  corruptions  make  necessary, 
on  the  part  of  all  who  would  not  be  partakers  in  them,  lies,  evi- 
dently, on  those  who  introduce,  and  not  on  those  who  resist, 
such  corruptions.  This  is  a  position  in  which  we  are  impreg- 
nably  fortified,  by  the  authority  of  the  greatest  names  in  the 
English  church.  We  will  only,  at  present,  call  your  attention 
to  the  opinion  of  Bishop  Sherlock.* 

"  The  plain  state  of  the  case,"  says  Sherlock,  "  is  this  :  All 

1)  Notes  of  tlie  Church  Examin-  Archbishop  Laud,  "  whose  the  fault  of 
ed,  p   56.  it  is  ;  and  he  makes  the  se])aralion  that 

2)  Serm.  at  Paul's  Cross.  gave  the  first  just  cause  of  it;   not  he 

3)  See  Lect.  XX.  and  XXI.  that  makes  an  actual  separation  upon  a 

4)  So  also  speak  Laud  and  Dod-  just  cause  first  given."    Laud  against 
well;    "The  schism  is  theirs,"  says  Fisher,  §  21,  N.  vi.  p.  9.   "  A  culpable 


LECT.  XVIII.]        THE  PRESByTERIAN  CHURCH  NOT  SCHISMATIC.  451 

churches  which  profess  the  true  faith  and  worship  of  Christ, 
though  intermixed  with  great  corruptions,  belong  to  the  one 
great  body  of  Christ ;  and  to  know  whether  any  church  be  a 
true  church,  we  must  not  so  much  inquire  which  they  communi- 
cate with,  or  separate  from,  but  what  their  faith  and  worship  is. 
That  external  unity  is  so  far  from  being  the  mark  of  a  true 
church,  that  we  may  be  bound  not  to  communicate  with  true 
churches  which  are  corrupt,  because  we  are  not  bound  to  com- 
municate in  a  corrupt  faith  or  worship  :  and  that,  in  this  case,  the 
guilt  of  separation  lies  on  that  side  where  the  corruptions  are. 
And  yet  all  the  christian  churches  in  the  world,  that  retain  the 
true  faith  and  worship  of  Christ,  though  they  are  divided  from 
each  other  upon  the  disputes  of  faith,  or  worship,  or  discipline, 
are  yet  the  one  church  of  Christ,  as  being  united  in  the  essen- 
tials of  faith  and  worship,  which,  by  the  institution  of  Christ, 
makes  them  his  one  mystical  body,  and  one  church.'" 

Now  it  has  never  yet  been  shown  —  nor  can  it  ever  be  — 
that  the  presbyterian  churches,  as  they  rest  upon  the  basis  of 
the  Westminster  confession,  are  chargeable  with  any  such  cor- 
ruptions, either  as  to  doctrine,  or  order.  "  In  fact  the  Apostle's  — 
the  Nicene  and  the  Athanasian  creeds  are,  —  the  first  verbatim, 
and  the  other  two  substantially  adopted  by  the  established 
church  of  Scotland."^  And  on  this  ground,  therefore,  they 
are  justified  from  the  odious  charge  of  schism. 

But  a  church  may  be  equally  liable  to  this  grievous  charge, 
when,  retaining  all  fundamental  truth,  it  yet  enforces  as  neces- 
sary to  be  believed  or  practised,  in  order  to  salvation,  or  to  com- 
munion with  the  church  catholic ;  that  which  Christ  or  his 
apostles  never  did  institute  as  thus  essential.  For,  by  thus 
binding  the  conscience  to  the  belief  or  practice,  of  that  which 
cannot  be  proved  to  be  of  divine  original  —  in  which  case  an 
implicit,  and  not  a  rational,  faith  is  demanded — all,  who  do 
not  recognize  such  crcdenda  or  such  agenda  as  divine,  but 
merely  as  human,  and  as  of  injurious  tendency  —  are  under 
obligation  to  reject  them.  And  since  their  adoption  is  made 
necessary  to  communion  with  the  body  requiring  them,  such 
persons  are  further  bound  to  withdraw  from  all  visible  associa- 
tion with  it.  Presbyterians,  therefore,  believing  that  God  alone 
is  Lord  of  the  conscience,  and  the  scriptures  alone  the  infallible 
rule  of  faith  and  practice,  have  ever,  and  at  all  hazards,  refused 

breach  of  the  church's  unity  is,"  says  and    Ref.      See    also    The    Ancient 

Dodwell,"  what  is  properly  meant  by  Things  of  the   Catholic  Church,  pp. 

the  true  nature  of  schism."    Dodwell  G,  8,  Tract  No.  1.53  of  Prot.  Ep.  Cli. 
on  Schism,  p.  568.  2)  Cuinmings'  Apol.  for  the  Ch. 

1)  See  Notes  of  the  Ch.  Exam.  of  Scotl.  Load.  1837,  p.  7. 


452  THE    LIBERAL   VIEWS    OF    PRESBYTERIANS,        [lECT.  XVIII. 

submission  to  any  dogmas  or  practices,  contrary  to,  or  beside 
these  sacred  institutes.  And  until  it  can  be  established,  as  of 
divine  right,  that  the  church  has  power  to  make  that,  as  a  matter 
of  conscience,  necessary,  which  God  has  not  so  enjoined  ;  pres- 
byterians  must  persist  in  refusing  their  sanction  to  a  principle  so 
utterly  subversive  of  the  throne  and  kingdom  of  our  only  Lord 
and  King  —  Christ  Jesus. 

Here  also  it  is  very  plain,  that  the  guilt  chargeable  upon  such 
separate  organization,  as  has  been  made  necessary  by  the  enforce- 
ment of  articles  of  faith,  rites,  or  ceremonies,  which  Christ  never 
made  necessary  —  must  attach  itself  to  those  who  have  usurped 
the  prerogatives  of  Heaven  ;  and  not  to  us  who,  in  all  our  con- 
tendings,  have  fought  under  the  banner  of  the  cross,  and  for  the 
crown  and  covenant  of  the  only  lawgiver  in  Zion. 

Even  this  charge,  however,  of  an  intolerant  exclusiveness, 
and  the  limitation  of  God's  gracious  favor  to  our  own  particular 
denomination,  and  to  our  own  peculiar  tenets,  —  even  this  charge 
has  been  confidently  made  against  us,  founded  upon  the  declara- 
tion contained  in  our  standards,  that  "  out  of  the  visible  church, 
there  is  no  ordinary  possibility  of  salvation."  Now  this  asser- 
tion we  believe  to  be  true.  But  that  any  one  particular  denom- 
ination, whether  the  Romish,  Anglican,  or  Greek,  constitutes 
the  visible  church,  out  of  which,  such  salvation  cannot  be  ordi- 
narily obtained,  this  we  deny.  Such  christian  bodies  are,  it  may 
be,  parts  of  that  visible  church ;  but  they  are  not  such  to  the 
exclusion  of  others.  Herein  our  church,  as  we  shall  afterwards 
have  occasion  more  fully  to  show,  differs  totally  from  the  Romish 
and  the  Anglican  prelacy.  With  them  we  agree,  in  believing 
that  there  is  no  ordinary  possibility  of  salvation,  beyond  the 
visible  church ;  but  from  them  we  differ  in  believing,  that 
covenanted  salvation,   is  not  only  possible  but  certain,  to  all. 

THE    ELECT  WHERESOEVER  and    IN   WHATEVER  CIRCUMSTANCES 

THEY  ARE  FOUND.  While  they  rcstnct  covenanted  mercy, — 
which  is  the  only  possible  mercy,  —  to  the  visible  church;  we 
extend  it  to  the  entire  body  of  the  invisible  church.  And  while 
they  identify  the  visible  church  with  their  respective  denomina- 
tions, and  thus  circumscribe  the  possibility  of  salvation  within 
their  boundaries,  we  define  the  visible  church  as  "  consisting  of 
all  those  throughout  the  world,  that  profess  the  true  religion, 
together  with  their  children  ;">  — and  as  embracing  all  particular 
churches,  be  they  more  or  less  pure.^  Thus  do  we  enlarge  the 
boundaries  of  the  visible  church,  so  as  to  include  the  whole 
world,  and  all  the  various  denominations  who  profess  the  true 

1)  Conf.  of  F.  ch.  XXV.  §  2.  2)  Ibid,  §  4. 


LECT.  XVIII,]  IN    CONTRAST   WITH    PRELATISTS.  453 

religion.     It  is  beyond  this  entire  and  comprehensive  body, — 

AND   NOT  BEYOND  THt;  PALE  OF   OUR  OWN   DENOMINATION, WC 

profess  to  say,  there  is  no  ordinary  possibility  of  salvation. 

Now  there  is  a  very  plain  and  yet  a  most  important  distinction 
to  be  here  observed,  and  upon  which  hinges  the  decision  of  this 
question.  There  may  be  a  separation  in  the  visible  church,  and 
a  separation  from  it.  In  the  one  case  the  separating;  body  still  re- 
mains within  the  pale  of  the  visible  church  ;  while,  in  the  other, 
it  is  excluded  from  it.  There  may  be  a  separation  by  one  por- 
tion of  the  visible  church,  from  some  doctrines,  practices,  or  pol- 
ity, of  other  portions  of  it ;  while  yet,  in  all  other  respects,  and  in 
the  maintenance  of  a  spirit  of  lo\  e  and  charity,  there  is  union 
and  communion  with  those  same  bodies.  Or  where  the  differ- 
ences are  regarded  as  essential,  there  may  be  a  withholdment  of 
any  visible  communion  by  those  who  yet  acknowledge  one 
another  as  parts  of  the  external,  or  visible  church.  It  is  thus 
with  the  presbyterian  denomination.  It  regards  itself  but  as 
one  component  member  of  the  great  body  of  the  visible  or  cath- 
olic church.  It  is  separated  from  other  members  of  this  christian 
confederacy,  by  certain  peculiar  views  of  christian  doctrine  and 
polity. 

But  this  separation  is  only  wuthin,  and  not  from  the  visible 
church  ;  for  in  this  church  it  expressly  includes  all  professing 
christians  throughout  the  world.  With  "  all  saints  that  are  united 
to  Jesus  Christ  their  head,  by  his  spirit  and  by  faith,"  our  church 
teaches  its  members  that  they  are  to  "have  communion  in  each 
other's  gifts  and  graces,  in  love.'" 

On  our  principles,  then,  there  is  no  difficulty  whatever  in  un- 
derstanding how  there  may  be  a  separation  of  the  numerous 
bodies  professing  the  true  faith,  in  some  things,  while  yet  they 
are  all  within,  and  none  of  them  without,  the  pale  of  the  visi- 
ble church.  Separation  from  the  visible  church  —  which  ex- 
cludes from  any  ordinary,  but  not  necessarily  from  any  cove- 
nanted salvation — is,  on  our  princijiles,  a  separation  from  all 
denominations  whatever,  which  profess  the  true  faith  ;  and  not 
a  separation  from  the  presbyterian  denomination  in  particular. 

But,  on  the  other  hand,  on  prelatic  principles,  both  Romish 
and  Anglican,  the  prelacy  being  supposed  to  be  the  catholic  visi- 
ble church,  and  prelacy,  therefore,  being  essential  to  the  very 
existence  of  that  church,  separation  from  the  prelacy  is  a  separ- 
ation not  within,  but  from  this  visible  church.  It  is  exclusion 
from  all  possibility  of  covenanted  mercy.  And  thus  are  we,  and 
all  other  branches  of  the  church,  who  are  guilty  of  the  inexpia- 

1)  Conf.  of  F.  ch.  xxvi.  §  1. 


454       THE    CATHOLIC    LIBERALITY    OF    PRESBYTERIANS,       [lECT.  XVIII. 

ble  offence  of  a  difference  of  views  as  it  regards  the  order  of  pre- 
lates, forever  cut  off"  from  the  only  covenunted  channel  of  the 
divine  mercy.  Thanks  be  to  God,  who  has  enabled  us  to  read 
his  blessed  word  differently,  and  thus  to  embrace,  in  the  arms  of 
charity,  all  who  in  every  church  and  in  every  place,  call  upon 
the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  both  theirs  and  ours. 

Is  it  not,  then,  demonstrably  plain,  that  while  we  are  free  from 
the  charge  of  originating  any  new  articles  of  faith,  or  of  imposing, 
as  necessary  to  salvation,  any  rites,  or  ceremonies,  not  enjoined  in 
the  word  of  God  ;  we  are  not  only  justified  from  the  imputation 
of  a  narrow  and  bigoted  exclusiveness,  but  are  eminently  distin- 
guished for  our  enlarged  and  comprehensive  charity  ? 

It  is  a  libel  upon  our  real  principles,  and  not  a  true  represen- 
tation of  the  case,  to  allege  that  we  have  stood  forth  in  rebellion 
against  the  church  catholic,  in  the  obstinate  vanity  of  our  own 
sectarian  views.  We,  as  presbyterians,  have  never  claimed  the 
right  of  enforcing  our  individual  opinions  —  no,  nor  even  our 
united  counsels,  as  of  divine  right,  upon  the  conscience  of  any 
man.  We  have,  on  the  contrary,  appealed  from  all  human 
judgment  to  that  which  is  divine  ;  from  the  word  of  men  to  the 
word  of  God ;  from  the  councils  of  fathers,  to  those  of  inspired 
apostles ;  and  from  tlie  authority  of  any  earthly  head  of  the 
church,  whether  he  be  a  fallen  and  corrupt  prince,  or  an  equally 
fallible  and  corrupt  pope,  to  the  supremacy  of  ouk  one 
AND  ONLY  lord  AND  MASTER.  We  havc  thus  givcu  our 
public  judgment,  as  expressed  in  all  our  confessions,  synods  and 
councils,  against  such  usurpation  as  utterly  subversive  of  the 
kingdom,  and  the  authority  of  Christ.  We  have,  therefore, 
reclaimed  our  ancient  rights;  —  our  original,  and  inalienable 
and  heaven-granted  privileges,  upon  the  very  ground  of  that 
written  charter  by  which  they  were  originally  bestowed. 

Neither  did  we,  in  dissevering  our  connexion  with  the  Eng- 
lish church,  as  we  did  in  our  fathers  in  England  ;  or  in  again 
lifting  the  standard  of  presbyterianism,  which  had  been  long 
trodden  in  the  dust,  by  the  tyranny  of  a  foreign  ecclesiastical 
power,  as  did  our  fathers  in  Scotland  ;  neither,  1  say,  did  we  in 
either  of  these  cases,  separate  from  the  catholic  or  universal 
church,  or  separate  that  church  from  us.  All  that  is  truly  cath- 
olic we  still  receive  and  venerate.  Her  ancient  creeds  we  still 
adopt  and  profess  as  our  faith  ;  and  in  her  steps  do  we  delight 
to  walk  as  far  as  she  followed  Christ.  In  that  holy,  catholic, 
and  apostolic  church,  as  instituted  by  Christ,  we  trust  with  an 
entire  faith ;  nor  would  we  exclude  from  our  communion  one 
genuine  son  or  daughter  of  this  heavenly  family.  We  would 
rather  rejoice  to  extend  to  them,  as  brethren  and  sisters,  all  the 
privileges  of  our  common  household. 


LECT.  XVIII.]         IN    CONTRAST    WITH    PRELATIC    BIGOTRY. 


455 


Neither  is  there  any  thing  in  the  true  principles  of  that  prim- 
itive church,  or  in  her  heavenly  record,  or  in  her  earliest  creeds, 
for  hundreds  of  years  together,  that  will  in  any  wise  warrant 
the  unnatural  separation  of  prelatists  from  their  non-prelaiic 
brethren;  or  their  foul  denial  of  our  common  spiritual  nature  ; 
or  their  unjustifiable  attempts  to  wrest  from  us  any  portion  in 
the  inheritance  of  our  heavenly  Father. 

If  the  English  church  was  justifiable  from  the  charge  of  schism, 
in  separating  from  the  Romish,  in  becoming  independent,  and 
in  re-modelling  her  forms,  order,  doctrine,  and  discipline,  be- 
cause, in  the  judgment  of  some  of  her  ministers  and  some  of 
her  people,  the  principles  of  the  reformation  were  accordant  to 
the  word  of  God,  and  sanctioned  by  its  authority,  although 
anathematized  at  Rome;  —  then  with  what  consistency  can  these 
sectaries,  these  dissenters  from  an  established  faith,  these  schis- 
matics, as  they  also  were  and  are  reputed,  turn  round  upon  us 
and  brand  us  with  names,  which  are  to  them  so  odious  ;  and 
that,  too,  for  doing  what  they  have  done,  and  upon  the  very 
principles  by  which  they  profess  to  have  been  guided  ?' 


1)  "  It  could  never  be  pretended 
for  a  moment,  that  a  church  which  de- 
rives its  succession  of  bishops  through 
any  other  church  is,  therefore,  subject 
to  it."'  Rev.  H  Gary  on"  the  Apos- 
tolical Succession  intheCh.  ofEng." 
p  6.  This  argument  is  admirably 
put  in  an  old  work  by  Vincent  Alsop, 
(The  Mischief,  of  Impositions,  1680, 
4to.  Ded.  p.  12,  in  Hanbury's  Hooker, 
vol.  i.  p.  92.)  "  If  Rome  be  a  '  trve  ' 
church  ;  if  she  holds  all  the  essential 
points  of  Christianity  ;  if  salvation 
may  be  attained  in  that  communion  ; 
why  was  there  such  a  stir  about 
reforming  of  accidents,  when  the  es- 
sentials were  secured  .'  Why  such  a 
contest  about  a  little  easier  way,  when 
the  other  was  passable .'  Why  all 
this  ado  about  a  purer  church,  when 
the  other  is  confessed  a  '  true  ' 
church?  These  things  will  follow, 
in  a  lump,  from  those  concessions  ; 
1.  That  a  person,  or  party,  may  sepa- 
rate from  some  '  true  '  church,  which 
holds  all  the  essential  points  of  the 
christian  faith,  without  the  imputation 
of  being  a  schismatic.  2.  That  a 
person,  or  party,  may  separate  from 
some  church  where  salvation  is  at- 
tainable, without  peril  of  the  guilt  of 
schism.  3.  That  the  only  reason,  that 
yet  appears,  to  justify  the  Church  of 
England's  departure  from  Rome  is, 
that  it  is  lawful,  in  some  cases,  to 
withdraw  from  the  commutiion  of  a 


'  true  '  church,  wherein  all  the  essen- 
tial points  of  faith  are  owned,  and 
wherein  salvation  may  be  attained  ; 
for  the  sake  of  greater  purity  of  wor- 
ship,greater  clearness  of  doctrine,  and 
greuUr  security  of  salvation.  Is  it, 
then,  lawful  for  England  to  separate 
from  Italy  for  greater  purity.'  it  may 
be  lawful  for  others  to  separate  Irom 
Ennland  for  greater  purity .''  It  is 
readily  acknowledged,  that  the  impu- 
rity of  the  Roman  synagogue  is  much 
more,  inconceivably  more,  than  that 
of  the  Church  of  England ;  and, 
therefore,  there  was  not  so  great  cause 
to  leave  the  latter  as  the  former,  upon 
that  account;  but,  in  aspiring  after 
conformity  to  the  institutions  of 
Christ,  we  are  not  to  consider  so 
much  what  is  behind,  as  what  is  be- 
fore ;  not  so  much,  what  we  have  left, 
as  what  we  have  yet  to  reach  ;  not  so 
much  the  terminus  a  quo, — from 
what  state  of  impurity  we  have 
emerged,  as  the  terminus  ad  quern, — 
to  what  state  of  purity  we  would  ar- 
rive. For,  if  it  be  true,  that  there  is 
such  a  state  of  purity  to  be  obtained, 
and  such  a  state  of  impurity  to  be 
avoided,  as  will  justify  our  forsaking 
of  this  for  that,  and  such  a  measure 
of  both  these  as  will  not;  it  must  be 
exactly  stated,  what  is  the  lowest  de- 
gree of  corruption  that  will,  and, 
what  is  the  highest,  that  will  not,  war- 
rant a  separation  !  " 


456  THE    ANGLICAN    CHURCH    SEPARATED   FROM    US.       [lECT.  XVIII. 

"The  reformation,"  says  Mr.  F.  W.  Faber,  "  was  not  schis- 
matical.  We  did  not  separate  from  Rome,  but  Rome  separated 
from  us."  And  how  does  he  reach  this  conclusion  ?  "  They," 
say  he,  "  denied  us  church  communion.  We  never  denied  it  to 
them."' 

Now,  in  like  manner  say  we,' — The  organization  of  our 
churches  was  not  schismatical.  We  did  not  separate  from  the 
Church  of  England,  but  she  separated  from  us.  And  why  ? 
They  denied  us  church  communion.  We  deny  it  not  to  them. 
We  remained  catholic  and  apostolic,  requiring  only  what  Christ 
instituted  and  taught.  They,  dissatisfied  with  that  common 
ground,  and  unwilling  to  abandon  powers  derived  from  tradition 
and  not  from  scripture,  have  selfishly  excluded  from  the  chris- 
tian community  all  who  dwell  beyond  their  holy  precincts.  But 
nevertheless,  we  never  have  separated  from  the  universal  church, 
nor  from  them  as  a  portion  of  that  church.     We  are  still  raem- 


1)  Tr.  No.  151  of  the  Prot.  Ep. 
Tr.  Soc.  p.  3. 

2)  "  We  hold,"  says  Rutherford, 
(Peaceable  Plea  for  Paul's  Presbytery, 
pp.  122,  123,)  "  that  Rome  made  the 
separation  from  the  reformed  church- 
es, and  not  we  from  them,  as  the  rot- 
ten wall  maketh  the  schism  in  the 
house,  when  the  house  standeth  still, 
and  the  rotten  wall  falleth. 

''  Because  we  left  not  Christianity 
in  Rome,  but  the  leprosy  of  popery 
growing  upon  Christianity,  seeing  we 
kept  the  apostolic  faitli,  and  did  posi- 
tively separate  from  the  pookes, 
blybes,  and  ulcers  of  christian  Rome. 

"  We  did  not  separate  from  the 
western  churches,  either  collectively, 
or  representatively  gathered  in  a  gen- 
eral council. 

"  We  departed  not  from  a  national, 
provincial,  or  parishional  church,  or 
pastors  that  we  had  before,  nor  from 
the  material  temples  and  churches, 
e.xcept  that  some  not  very  considera- 
ble hirelings  and  idol-pastors  would 
not  go  before  us. 

"  And  because  the  succession  of 
fundamental  truths  from  genera- 
tions to  generations  is  as  necessary  as 
the  perpetual  existence  of  the  true 
catholic  church,  while  the  covenant 
with  night  and  day,  and  the  ordinan- 
ces of  Heaven  shall  continue,  (Jer. 
xxxi.  37.)  therefore  there  were  a 
succession  of  professors  and  members 
of  the  catholic  church,  that  did  ever 
hold  these   fundamentals,  which  we 


to  this  day  hold  against  Rome  ;  sup- 
pose histories  cannot  clear  the  partic- 
ular persons  by  name. 

"  We  have  not  separated  from 
Rome's  baptism  and  ordination  of 
pastors  according  to  the  substance  of 
the  act,  nor  from  the  letter  of  the 
twelve  articles  of  the  creed  and  con- 
tents of  the  Old  and  New  Testament, 
as  they  stand  with  relation  to  the  mind 
and  intent  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  how- 
beit  we  have  left  the  false  interpreta- 
tions of  the  lords  of  poor  people's  faith 
and  consciences." 

Is  it  retorted  that  the  Romish 
church  was  always  the  Romish 
church  .-"  We  ask,  "  who,  what,  where 
is  the  church  of  Rome  .'  (Bait.  Lit.  & 
Rel.  Mag.  Ap.  1840, p.  147)  Whatis 
that,  of  whose  unity  we  speak  .''  Do 
you  mean  all  the  faithful  ?  Or  only  all 
the  ecclesiastics  .'  Or  only  the  priests  ? 
Or  only  the  prelates  .''  Or  only  the 
cardinals  and  the  pope.'  Or  only  the 
pope .'  If  any  one  will  examine 
the  great  Latin  work  of  the  celebrat- 
ed Petir  de  Marca,  entitled  the  '  Con- 
cord of  the  Empire  and  the  Priesthood,' 
he  will  see  reason  enough  to  be  satis- 
fied, that  the  very  body,  which  boasts 
of  its  unity,  is  itself  not  only  incapa- 
ble of  establishing  its  personal  identi- 
ty, by  any  rules  of  judgment  estab- 
lished and  admitted  by  itself;  but  that 
in  truth,  taking  its  own  principles  as 
the  guide  of  our  judgment,  we  cannot 
avoid  concluding  it  entirely  out  of 
existence  !  " 


LECT.  XVIII.]    PRELACY  CONDEMNED,  OR  PRESBYTERY  SUSTAINED.     457 

bers  of  the  one,  catholic,  and  apostolic  church,  and  glory  in  its 
heaven-bought  privileges. 

But  further.  The  Church  of  England  is  not,  we  are  equally- 
assured,  and  as  we  think  on  good  grounds,  chargeable  with 
schism,  in  her  separation  from  the  church  of  Rome,  because  "  of 
its  original  independence  on  the  see  of  Rome.'"  Now  if  the 
power  of  the  church  of  Rome  was  illegal  and  usurped,  because 
contrary  to  the  original  and  chartered  freedom  of  the  churches 
of  Christ ;  just  as  certainly  is  the  asserted  authority  of  the  Church 
of  England,  by  which  she  requires  conformity  to  her  impositions, 
illegal,  and  an  usurpation  upon  the  just  rights  of  conscience  and 
of  private  judgment;  and  to  resist  and  spurn  from  us  such  as- 
sumed authority,  is  therefore  no  more  schism  in  presbyterians, 
than  it  is  in  prelatists.  For  even  were  it  proved,  as  it  never  has 
been,  and  we  believe  never  can  be,  that  the  most  ancient  form  of 
British  Christianity  was  prelatic,  and  not  rather,  as  we  think,  pres- 
byterian,  yet  still,  if  the  charter  of  the  church  is  not  prelatic, 
but  on  the  contrary,  gives  commission  to  but  one  order  of  teach- 
ing ministers,  then,  as  Tertullian  teaches,  "nobody  can  prescribe 
against  the  truth,   neither  space  of  times,  nor  the  patronage  of 

persons,  nor  the  privilege  of  countries, since  our  Lord 

calls  himself  the  Truth,  not  custom."" 

And  besides,  if  a  disputed  claim  to  original  independence,  is 
a  warrantable  reason,  for  throwing  off  allegiance  to  the  despo- 
tism of  Rome  ;  then  is  it  an  equally  sufficient  plea,  for  our  re- 
jection of  the  equally  unjustifiable  claims  of  the  prelatic  hierar- 
chy. For,  tracing  our  descent,  as  the  presbyterian  church  in 
this  country  does,  through  that  of  Scotland,  which  we  are  clear- 
ly entitled  to  do  ;  then  it  is  a  fact  that  we  never  did  belong 
to  the  Church  of  England.  Over  us  she  never  did  have  any 
rightful  jurisdiction.  And  while  she  struggled  hard  to  forge  up- 
on us  the  shackles  of  her  service-books,  her  doctrines,  and  her 
forms,  yet  never  has  she  been  able  to  subdue  the  indomitable 
spirit  of  Scottish  freedom,  which  chose  poverty  and  death,  rath- 
er than  abandon  the  liberty  wherewith  Christ  had  made  her 
free.  We  are  descended  from  that  churrh  which  wrested,  even 
from  a  despotic  crown,  the  reluctant  charter  of  her  independent 
establishment ;  —  from  which  all  prelatists  in  Scotland,  are  dis- 
senters and  separatists;  —  and  against  us,  therefore,  it  is  most 
preposterous  absurdity,  in  this  country,  and  by  an  unestab- 
LisHED  prelacy,  to  raisc  the  cry  of  schism  and  dissent. 3 

1)  Jones'  Essay  on  the  Church         Scotland,  in  A  Hind  Let  Loose,  &c. 
Wks.  vol.  iv.  p.  466.  by  Alexander  Shiels.   Glasgow,  1797, 

2)  Lib.  de  Velaud.  Virg.  cap.  i.  p.  835.     See  e.  g.  pref.  p.  10,  and  pp. 

3)  See   this  charge    plentifully        269,280,309. 

laid  to   the   account  of  prelatists  in  This   author  fully   vindicates    the 

58 


458  PRESBYTERY  NEVER  IN  LEGAL  BONDAGE  TO  PRELACY.  [LECT.  XVIII. 

Tracing  our  spiritual  lineage  directly  to  the  church  of  Scotland, 
through  emigrants  from  that  country,  and  her  ecclesiastical  colo- 
ny, the  North  of  Ireland,  we  may  say  to  the  English  church, 
as  did  the  Jews  to  Christ,  "  we  were  never  in  bondage  to  any 
man.'"''  Many  a  century  did  our  forefathers  resist  the  aggres- 
sions of  Rome,  and  cling  to  the  simpler  forms  of  her  primitive 
presbyterianism.  And  when  the  spirit  of  reform  re-animated 
her  oppressed,  and  down-trodden  children,  she  plainly  saw  that 
popery  and  prelacy  were  essentially  united,  and  that  to  be  de- 
livered wholly  from  the  trammelling  corruptions  of  the  one,^  she 
must    tear  from   her  every  remnant   of  a   spiritual   hierarchy. 


church  of  Scotland  "  for  refusing  to 
acknowledge  a  corrupt  ministry," 
where  "  the  question  of  hearing  cu- 
rates is  cleared."  See  particularly  on 
page  '25S,  &c.  '•  Finally,  for  union's 
sake,  and  to  avoid  schism  in  the 
body,  we  must  withdraw  from  them." 
p.  309,  &c. 

See  this  charge  also  fully  retorted 
on  them,  as  it  regards  Scotland,  in 
Henderson's  Review  and  Considera- 
tion, Ef'inb.  1706,  p.  55.  "  Besides," 
says  Dr.  Mitcl'.ell,  (Presb.  Letters,  p. 
2d9,)  "  the  episcopacy  of  Scotland, 
unlike  the  religion  of  the  primitive 
church,  was  established  bj^  the  most 
unpardonable  treachery  and  perfidy, 
which  were  followed  up  by  downright 
force  ;  and  it  was  thus  established  on 
the  ruins  of  a  form  of  ciiristianity, 
which  had  been,  for  a  considerable 
time,  in  legal  and  quiet  possession  of 
the  place  it  held  in  the  country  ;  and 
finally,  it  was  supported  by  fine  and 
imprisonment,  confiscation  of  goods, 
hanging,  burning,  and  such  like  ar- 
guments, not  quite  so  christian  as  they 
are  potent." 

Dr.  Mitchell,  in  his  Letters  to  Bp. 
Skinner,  further  says,  (p.  25,)  "  and 
Bishop  Skinner  is,  '  by  the  grace  of 
God,'  primate  of  a  church,  which  is  a 
schismatic  of  schismatics  ;  for  it  sepa- 
rated from  us  after  we  had  separated 
from  Rome." 

1)  Dr.  Campbell,  of  Armagh,  in 
his  Vindication  of  the  presbyterians 
of  Ireland,  in  answer  to  the  attack  of 
the  Bishop  of  Cloyne,  (Lond.  1787, 
pp.  65  -67,)  after  giving  a  historical  re- 
view of  that  people,  remarks  :  "  From 
this  account  you  will  observe,  my 
Lord,  that  the  establishment  of  the 
presbyterians  in  Ireland  was  of  a  pe- 
culiar kind  ;  that  they  were  not  dis- 
senters from  your  church,  more  than 


you  were  dissenters  ;  that  they  made 
no  rent  or  breach  in  your  church,  of 
which  they  were  never  members,  ex- 
cept by  a  comprehension,  which 
should  ever  be  desirable  to  liberal 
minds.  And  I  apprehend  it  will  be 
very  difficult  for  you  to  point  out,  on 
just  principles  of  policy  in  this  king- 
dom, what  the  reasons  of  state  are, 
that  should  exalt  the  episcopal  church 
so  very  high,  and  depress  the  presby- 
terian  church  so  very  low.  For  it  may 
be  observed.  1st.  Tliat  they  were  not 
so  originally.  The  presbyterians  in 
Ulster,  by  an  encouragement  of  gov- 
ernment, were  on  a  fair  and  equal  foot- 
ing, as  we  have  seen,  so  far  as  the  dif- 
ference of  their  church  discipline  per- 
mitted. 

"  2.  That,  in  establishing  their 
church,  they  had  peculiar  privileges  ; 
that  these  privileges  they  never  forfeit- 
ed to  the  state,  but  that  they  were  torn 
from  them  by  those  men,  who  over- 
turned the  constitution. 

"  3.  That,  from  the  nature  of  their 
first  establishment,  they  have  not  only 
a  right  to  a  toleration,  in  conrmon 
with  other  good  subjects,  but  have  a 
claim  on  the  state  for  support  and 
protection ;  and  that  this  claim  is 
strengthened  by  the  manner,  in  which 
they  lost  the  privileges  and  emolu- 
ments of  their  church. 

"  4.  Tliat  they  were  invited  here  to 
strengthen  the  hands  of  government, 
and  to  support  the  constitution  ;  and 
that,  for  this  end,  the  whole  body  of 
presbyterians  was  firmly  united  ;  but 
that  the  established  church  was  not 
thus  united,  many  of  its  members  be- 
ing violent  in  their  opposition  to  King 
William,  and  to  the  Hanover  succes- 
sion ;  of  which  a  thousand  proofs 
might  be  adduced,  besides  those  al- 
ready oflfered." 


LECT.  XVIII.]  OUR    SCOTTISH    AND    PURITAN    ANCESTRY.  459 

Her  spirit  we  have  received  by  inheritance.  It  has  descended 
to  us  from  our  sires.  It  was  breathed  into  us  by  mothers  who 
were  worthy  of  those  noble  women,  who  crowded  around  the 
representative  of  a  despotic  monarch,  and  wrung  from  him  a 
hearing  of  the  wrongs  of  their  persecuted  Zion.'  With  it  our 
minds  are  imbued,  and  to  its  preservation  we  are  eternally 

PLEDGED.* 

Look  we  again  to  our  brethren,  the  Puritans  and  noncon- 
formists of  England.  With  all  their  faults  —  their  errors  and  their 
short-comings  —  we  love,  honor,  and  revere  them.  To  claim 
descent  from  them  we  should  not  be  ashamed  ;  and  to  stand  or 
fall  with  their  justification,  in  allowing  themselves  to  be  driven 
out  from  the  English  church,  rather  than  pollute  their  conscien- 
ces, by  a  base  conformity  to  the  impositions  of  men,  we  are  not 
reluctant.  On  either  hand  we  are  sustained  by  proof  strong  as 
holy  writ.  As  the  mountains  are  round  about  Jerusalem,  so  are 
the  decisions  of  God's  holy  word  round  about  us,  to  protect  and 
defend  us  against  these  aspersions  of  men. 

It  is  further  urged,  as  an  argumentum  ad  invidiam,  against 
us,  that  we  countenance  and  support  the  ancient  schismatics, 
who  were  held  in  reprobation  by  the  early  church.  This  argu- 
ment, which  Dr.  Stillingfleet  brought  forward  in  his  work  "  On 
the  Unreasonableness  of  Separation,"  has  been  stereotyped  by 
all  succeeding  publishers  of  prelatical  treatises. 

But  the  argument  is  unsound.  It  is  worse.  It  is  subversive 
of  the  very  cause  it  is  brought  to  sustain.  It  is  not  true  when 
applied  to  us.     It  is  true  when  applied  to  its  avouchers. 

And,  fiist,  this  argument  is  not  true  when  applied  to  presby- 
terian  and  other  orthodox  denominations.  This  appears,  first, 
from  the  fact  that  the  church,  that  is,  the  doctrines  and  princi- 
ples of  the  church,  from  which  these  ancient  schismatics  separ- 

1)  See  McCrie's  Life  of  Knox.  their  communion,  which  was  likewise 

2)  The  author  cannot  but  express      too  much,  and  too  industriously  dis- 
his  surprise,  that  the   descendants  of      coursed  at  home." 

the  Huguenots  should  be  so  generally  He  rejoices,  however,  in  knowing 

found    embosomed    in    the    prelacy,  that  some  worthy  descendants  of  this 

when  it  was  against  them  it  first  man-  noble    ancestry,  are    not  willing,  for 

ifested    its    intolerant    and    haughty  the    sake    of  nny    prelatic  honors  or 

assumptions.       Lord    Clarendon    in-  distinction,  or  from  any  other  motive, 

forms  us,  that  "  Lord  Scudamore,  the  to  brand  their  forefathers,  who  gave 

last  ordinary  ambassador  at  Paris,  not  property    and    life    in    exchange    foi 

only    declined    going   to    Charenton,  Calvinism  in  doctrine  and  presbyteri- 

(the  protestant  church,)  but  furnished  anism   in    polity,   as   schismatics,    or 

his  own  chapel  with  wax  candles  on  aliens  from  all   hopes  of  covenanted 

the  communion  table,  &c.     And,  be-  mercy;    or   to   excommunicate    from 

sides,  was  careful  to  publish,  upon  all  the  church  catholic,  those  who  abide 

occasions  by  himself,  and  those  who  by   their  sentiments,  and  who  glorj 

had  the   nearest  relation  to  him,  that  also   in  their  connexion    with   them, 

the  Church  of  England  looked  not  upon  and  many  of  them  in  their   descent 

the  Huguenots  of  France,  as  a  part  of  from  them. 


460  THE   ANCIENT    SCHISMATICS  — WHAT?  [lECT.  XVIII. 

ated,  was  not  the  same  with  that  church  from  which  we  are 
declared  to  be  schismatics.  Our  rejection  of  the  ecclesiastical 
control  of  the  Anglican  prelacy,  is  not,  therefore,  as  theirs  was, 
a  separation  from  the  communion  of  the  church  catholic.  It  is 
a  withdrawment  from  external  communion  with  a  body,  which 
usurps  the  exclusive  title  of  the  catholic  church,  in  those  par- 
ticulars only  in  which,  as  we  believe,  it  has  separated  from 
Christ.  This  will  be  evident,  in  the  second  place,  if  we  con- 
sider the  occasion,  motives,  and  ends  of  these  ancient  schisms. 
It  will  thus  be  found,  by  a  recurrence  to  their  history,'  that  they 
arose  from  the  disappointed  ambition  of  men  who  desired  to 
impose  their  peculiar  views,  on  certain  matters,  upon  all  others, 
as  terms  of  communion  ;  and  who,  being  opposed  and  thwarted 
in  these  designs,  left  the  communion  of  all  other  churches;  — 
erected  churches  of  their  own  ;  and  excommunicated  all  beside. 
So  was  it  with  the  Novatians,  the  Donatists,  with  Tertullian,  and 
many  others. 

Now,  the  fundamental  principle  upon  which  we  base  our  repu- 
diation of  prelatical  dictation  and  control,  is  just  the  reverse  of 
this.  For  the  chief  reason  we  assign,  is  their  unwarrantable 
assumption  of  the  very  power  claimed  by  these  ancient  schismat- 
ics, of  imposing  upon  the  church  terms  and  conditions  of  com- 
munion which  are  not  sanctioned  by  God's  holy  word. 

This  will  be  still  further  evinced,  when  we  attend  more  par- 
ticularly, and  in  the  third  place,  to  the  nature  of  these  ancient 
schisms.  Now,  their  authors  so  separated  from  all  other 
churches  as  to  deny  to  them  the  character  of  true  churches; 
or  any  efficient  and  valid  ministrations  ;  or  any  possibility  of  sal- 
vation. We,  on  the  contrary,  do  not  deny  the  church  state  of 
other  denominations  :  we  do  not  reject,  but  recognize,  their  min- 
istry and  sacraments  ;  and  rejoice  in  extending  the  possibility  of 
salvation  to  all  throughout  the  world,  who  profess  the  true  re- 
ligion.2 

It  is,  therefore,  most  contrary  to  fact  and  to  honorable  argu- 
ment, to  accuse  us  of  a  participation  in  the  same  criminality  with 
these  ancient  schismatics,  when  we  are  found  to  differ  from  them 
in  every  thing  essential,  and  to  stand  opposed  to  that  funda- 
mental principle  which  constituted  the  gravamen  of  their  schism. 

1)  See  particularized  in  Dr.  Ow-  sive  ordination  of  bishops,  which 
en's  Wks,  vol.  XX.  pp.  296,  298-303,  having,  as  they  tliought,  (unduly 
and  vol.  xix.  p.  194,  &c.  enough,)  failed  in  one  or  two  instan- 

2)  "  And  that  wliich  was  the  ani-  ces,  it  became  the  destruction  of  a 
mating  principle  of  the  tumult  of  the  church  state,  not  only  in  tlie  churches 
Donatists,"  says  Dr.  Owen;  (Wks.  where  such  mistakes  had  happened, 
vol.  XX.  p.  244,)  "  was  a  supposition,  as  they  surmised,  but  unto  all  the 
that  the  continuation  of  the  true  churches  in  tlie  world,  that  would 
church  state  depended  on  the  Bucces-  not  hold  communion  with  them." 


LECT.  XVIII.]  FOREFATHERS  NOT  SEPARATISTS,  BUT  SEPARATED.   461 

While,  therefore,  we  acknowledge  the  claims  of  the  prelacy 
to  be  churches  and  ministers  of  Christ,  —  while  we  hesitate  not 
to  unite  with  them  in  communion  and  in  worship,  and  only  sep- 
arate from  them  in  those  things  which  we  must  believe  to  be 
unsu[)ported  by  God's  word,  or  to  be  in  themselves  inexpedient, 
or  injurious  —  with  what  face  can  the  charge  of  schism,  as 
alleged  against  these   ancient  schismatics,  be  made  against  us  i 

But  in  the  fourth  place,  it  is  to  be  observed,  that  schism,  ac- 
cording to  the  definition,  universally  approved  by  Romish  and 
other  prelatical  writers,  implies  necessarily  a  voluntary  or  cause- 
less separation  from  the  catholic  church.  Now  the  separation 
of  these  ancient  schismatics  was  voluntary,  and  in  many  cases, 
though  not  in  all,  without  sufficient  cause.  It  was  also  a  separ- 
ation from  the  catholic  visible  church,  and  not  from  any  particu- 
lar denomination.  And,  therefore,  were  they  justly  concluded, 
according  to  this  definition,  to  be  chargeable  with  the  guilt  of 
schism. 

But  as  it  regards  ourselves,  we  utterly  deny  that  the  separation 
of  our  forefathers  from  the  Romish  or  Anglican  churches,  was 
voluntary  or  causeless.  On  the  contrary,  it  was  made  neces- 
sary by  the  plain  requisitions  of  God's  word,  which  forbade  their 
communion  with  unscriptural  dogmas,  and  unchristian  rites.  And 
being  thus  withheld  from  all  submission  to  such  enactments, 
while  yet  these  churches  obstinately  persisted  in  imposing  them, 
on  pain  of  anathemas  and  civil  penalties,  they  were  driven  out  by 
bell,  book,  and  candle,  and  thus  separated  from  the  bosom  of 
their  ancestral  homes. 

We  further  deny  that  they  separated  from  the  communion 
of  the  catholic  church.  From  this  church,  considered  as  in- 
visible, no  power  on  earth,  or  in  hell,  can  ever  separate 
one  soul  which  has  become  truly  united  to  it.  From  that 
church  considered  as  visible,  nothing  else  can  separate  but 
apostacy  from  the  faith  of  Christ,  or  disobedience  to  some  insti- 
tution of  Christ.  But  in  neither  of  these  senses  did  our  fathers 
separate  from  the  catholic  church.  On  the  contrary,  it  was  for 
their  maintenance  of  these  very  doctrines  and  institutions,  in  their 
purity  and  their  entireness,  they  were  driven  out  by  the  ghostly 
rule  of  the  governors  of  the  church.  That  from  which  they 
separated  —  that  to  which  they  steadfastly  refused  submission  — 
was  the  superadded  dogmas  and  self-imposed  rites  and  ceremo- 
nies which  Christ  never  instituted  ;  and  to  enforce  which  he 
never  gave  authority  to  the  rulers  of  the  church.  To  these, 
therefore,  our  fathers  neither  were,  nor  could  be,  subject.  Com- 
pliance with  them  and  belief  of  them,  would,  on  the  contrary, 
have  been  traitorous  infidelity  to  the  head  of  the  church. 


462    ANCIENT  SCHISMATICS  AND  PRELATISTS  IDENTIFIED.    [lECT.  XVIII. 


Were  we,  even  now,  in  ecclesiastical  subjection  to  the  Rom- 
ish church,  or  to  a  church  modelled  on  these  prelatic  principles, 
then  would  our  protestation  aj^ainst  their  errors  and  unscriptural 
practices  be  as  imperative  as  it  was  in  former  days;  and  our  sep- 
aration from  them  as  conscientiously  required.  And  not  only 
would  we  be  bound  to  withdraw  from  these  churches,  but  as  Dr. 
Owen  strongly  but  truly  affirms,  "  from  all  of  them  in  the  whole 
world,  one  after  another,  should  they  all  consent  unto  the  same 
thing,  and  impose  it  in  the  same  manner ;  if  there  be  any  truth 
in  that  maxim,  '  It  is  better  to  obey  God  than  man.'  "^ 

But,  when  we  consider  the  case  of  this  prelatic  church,  do  we 
not  find  a  very  striking  analogy  between  its  principles  and  con- 
duct, and  tiiose  of  these  ancient  schismatics,  to  whom  they 
liken  us. 

Like  them,  the  Anglican  church  has  separated  from  the  Rom- 
ish church,  and  has  utterly  disavowed  all  connexion,  intercourse, 
or  communion,  with  the  reformed  churches.  Like  them,  are 
they  found  condemning  all  other  churches,  disowning  their 
ministry,  rejecting  their  sacraments,  and  denying  to  them  the 
possibility  of  covenanted  mercy.     And  as  those  ancient  schisms 


1)  Dr.  Rice  informs  Bishop  Ra- 
venscroil,  (Evang.  and  Lit.  Mag.  vol. 
ix.  pp.  492,  493,  494,)  that"  he  had  no 
hesitation  nor  t-cruple  to  receive  tiie 
communion  from  episcopal  hands;* 
until  he  plainly  enough  understood 
that  episcopal  hands  would  not  re- 
ceive of  him  ;  that  is,  tiiat  episcopa- 
lians separated  themselves  from  all 
other  denominations,  denying  their 
church-membership,  their  ordination, 
and  the  validity  of  all  their  adminis- 
trations." "  According  to  the  old  bad 
Latin  proverb,  novas  rex  novas  UxA 
And  the  reviewer,  after  much  serious 
deliberation,  determined  no  longer  to 
receive  the  communion  from  episco- 
pal hands,  because,  in  his  judgment, 
episcopal  practice  in  this  case  is  schis- 
matical.  It  is  an  effectual  rending  of 
the  body  of  Christ.  It  is  a  separation 
of  christians  from  one  another,  on  ac- 
count of  matters,  which,  so  far  from 
being  essential  to  the  being  of  the 
church,  have  never,  in  any  age,  con- 
duced to  its  purity.  The  spirit  of  llie 
episcopal  church  in  this  daj',  would 
have  been  regarded  as  schismalical  by 
the  fathers  and  reformers  of  the 
Church   of  England.     For   they  did 

*  Epi.icopal  hands  here  are  the  hands  of  a 
bishop. 

t  It  ia  about  as  good,  however,  as  the  bisli- 
op's  "  Fast  est  ab  hoste  docore." 


acknowledge  the  foreign  protestants, 
as  branches  of  the  church  of  Christ; 
and  they  did  not,  by  the  nineteenth  ar- 
ticle, mean  to  exclude  them  from  the 
body  of  God's  covenanted  people." 

"  Chiefly,  then,  on  account  of  the 
mere  matter  of  orders,  episcopalians 
cut  off  from  the  church  of  God,  and 
all  its  covenanted  mercies,  and  all  its 
precious  hopes,  this  great  body  of 
protestants.  They  separate  them- 
selves from  this  communion  of  saints, 
and  cast  them  off  from  christian  fel- 
lowship. If  this  is  not  schismalical 
conduct,  we  do  not  know  what  schism 
is.  After  coming  to  this  conclusion, 
we  could  not  any  longer  receive  the 
communion  from  '  episcopal  hands.'  " 
'•  And  now,  as  ministers  of  the  Lord 
Jesus,  we  solemnly  warn  and  exhort 
Bishop  R.,  and  all  who  think  with 
him,  to  consider,  whether  the  charge, 
which,  often  in  bitter  terms,  they 
bring  against  non-episcopalians,  and 
the  denunciations,  which  they  fear 
not  to  utter  against  them,  may  not 
return  on  their  own  souls  in  another 
day,  when  the  great  head  of  the 
church  will  make  it  appear  before  the 
universe,  how  little  value  he  places 
on  matters  merely  external,  and  how 
highly  he  values  that  love,  which  is 
the  fulfilling  of  the  law." 


LECT.  XVIII,]    ANCIENT  SCHISMATICS  AND  PRELATISTS  IDENTIFIED.    463 

in  Alexandria,  Antioch,  Constantinople,  Rome,  and  other  pla- 
ces,' arose  chiefly  from  tiie  pride,  ambition  and  despotism  of  the 
prelates,*  so  have  the  entire  divisions,  distractions,  and  schisms 
of  modern  times,  resulted  from  the  unyielding  tyranny  of  pre- 
lates, in  the  imposition  of  their  orders,  rites,  and  ceremonies,  as 
necessary  terms  of  communion.  And  do  we  not  find  these 
modern  prelates  re-affirming  the  very  principles,  which  were 
anciently  condemned  as  inhuman  and  contrary  to  brotherly  love  ?' 
Do  they  not,  many  of  them,  avow  false  doctrines  and  errors  ? 
Do  they  not,  as  they  did,  exalt  themselves  and  their  church  to 
an  exclusive  preeminence  ?  Do  they  not,  as  they  also  did, 
enjoin  as  necessary  what  Christ  never  so  required  ?  And  if, 
like  those  ancient  schismatics,  modern  prelates  deny  covenanted 
mercy,  and  the  sacraments,  and  a  ministry,  to  all  who  will  not 
submit  to  their  interpretation  of  the  Bible,  and  thus  identify 
themselves  with  them  ;  how  are  they  to  escape  from  a  hke  con- 
demnation, or  from  involving  themselves  in  their  immorality  ? 

The  rebuke  given  by  Archbishop  Usher  to  the  Roman- 
ists is  no  less  applicable  to  these  prelatists :  "  And  yet,"  says 
he,''  "  this  proud  dame  and  her  daughters,  the  particular  church  of 
Rome,  I  mean,  and  that  which  they  call  the  catholic  Roman  (or 


1)  Owen,  p.  302. 

2)  See  Baxter's  True  and  Only 
Way  of  Concord,  Lond.  1680,  pt.  ii. 
ch.  V.  p.  200,  and  pt.  iii.  ch.  i.  p.  5, 
&c.  where  instances  are  named.  Bp. 
Davenant,  in  his  epistle  to  Durseus, 
gives  it  as  •'  the  first  and  great  obstn- 
cle,  which  hud  as  yet  prevented  the 
union  of  the  churches  of  the  reforma- 
tion, "  est  usurpatum  uniusin  alteram 
dominium  ac  tyrannicje  cujusilam 
potestatis  exercitum."  Cantab.  1G40, 
p.  G. 

"  But  here  lay  the  original  of  the 
differences,"  says  Dr.  Owen,  (Wks. 
vol.  XX.  p.  2!)4,)  and  "  schisms  which 
fell  out  in  the  third,  fourth,  and  lifth 
centuries ;  that  having  all  in  some 
measure  departed  from  the  original 
institution,  rule  and  order  of  evan- 
gelical churches,  in  sundiy  things, 
and  cast  themselves  into  new  forms 
and  orders,  their  differences  and 
quarrels  related  unto  them,  and  could 
have  had  no  such  occasion,  had  they 
kept  themselves  unto  their  primitive 
constitution." 

3)  Owen,  p.  299,  vol.  xx.  and  p. 
303.  "  This  claim  of  theirs  to  be  the 
only  true  catholic  church,  so  as  to 
deny  the  validity  of  our  ordinances, 
is,  says  Dr.  Owen,   (Wks.  vol.  xix. 


p.  196.)  "1.  Cruel  and  sanguinary; 
condemning  millions  to  hell,  that  in- 
vocate  and  call  on  the  name  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  believing  all  things 
that  are  written  in  the  Old  and  New 
Testaments,  for  no  other  cause  in  the 
world,  but  because  they  are  not  con- 
vinced that  it  is  I  heir  duty  to  give  up 
reason,  faith,  soul,  and  all  to  them, 
and  at  their  disposal. 

'•2.  It  is  false,  that  the  union  of 
the  catholic  church  in  the  notion  now 
under  consideration,  consists  in  sub- 
jection to  any  officer  or  officers  ;  or 
that  it  lialh  any  peculiar  form,  consti- 
tuting one  churcii  in  relation  to  them, 
or  in  joint  participation  of  the  same 
individual  ordinances  whatever,  by 
all  the  members  of  it ;  or  that  any 
such  oneness  is  at  all  possible  ;  or 
any  unity  whatever,  but  that  of  the 
faith  which  by  it  is  believed,  and  of 
the  truth  professed.  3.  It  is  most 
ridiculous,  that  they  are  this  catholic 
church,  or  that  their  communion  is 
comprehensive  of  it  in  its  latitude. 
He  must  be  blind,  uncliaritable,  a 
judge  of  what  he  cannot  see  or  know, 
who  can  once  entertain  a  thought  of 
any  such  thing." 

4)  Serm.  bef.  his  Majesty,  Lond. 
1687,  4th  edit.  pp.  8,  9. 


464         PRELACY,  NOT  PRESBYTERY,  GUILTY  OF  SCHISM.       [LECT.  XVIII. 

the  faction  rather  that  prevaileth  in  them  both)  have  in  these  lat- 
ter ages  confined  the  whole  church  of  Christ  within  themselves, 
and  excluded  all  others  that  were  under  the  Roman  obedience, 
as  aliens  from  the  commonwealth  of  Israel,  and  strangers  from 
the  covenants  of  promise.  The  Donatists  were  cried  out  against 
by  our  forefathers,  for  shutting  up  the  church  within  the  parts 
of  the  south;  and  rejecting  all  others  that  held  not  correspon- 
dency with  that  patch  of  theirs  :  and  could  they  think  well  then 
of  them  that  should  conclude  the  church  within  the  western 
parts  of  the  world,  and  exclude  all  other  christians  from  the 
body  of  Christ,  that  held  by  the  same  root  there  that  they  did  ? 
It  is  a  strange  thing  to  me,  that  wise  men  should  make  such 
large  discourses  of  the  catholic  church,  and  bring  so  many  tes- 
timonies to  prove  the  universality  of  it ;  and  not  discern,  that 
while  by  this  means  tliey  think  they  have  gotten  a  great  victory, 
they  have  in  very  truth  overthrown  themselves :  for  when  it 
cometh  to  the  point,  instead  of  the  catholic  church  which  con- 
sisteth  of  the  communion  of  all  nations,  they  obtrude  their  own 
piece  unto  us ;  circumscribing  the  church  of  Christ  within  the 
precincts  of  the  Romish  jurisdiction,  and  leaving  all  the  world 
beside  to  the  power  of  Satan  ;  for  with  them  it  is  a  resolved  case, 
that  to  every  creature  it  is  altogether  of  necessity  to  salvation, 
to  be  subject  to  the  Roman  bishop." 

"  What  must  then  become  of  the  poor  Muscovites  and  Gre- 
cians (to  say  nothing  of  the  reformed  churches)  in  Europe  ? 
What  of  the  Egyptian  and  Ethiopian  churches  in  Africa  ?  What 
of  the  great  companies  of  christians  scattered  over  all  Asia,  even 
from  Constantinople  unto  the  East  Indies,  which  have  and  still 
do  endure  more  afflictions  and  pressures  for  the  name  of  Christ, 
than  they  have  ever  done,  that  would  be  accounted  the  only 
friends  of  Christ?  Must  these,  because  they  are  not  the  pope's 
subjects,  be  therefore  denied  to  be  Christ's  subjects  ?  " 

So  speaks  this  truly  great  and  eminent  man,  and  in  thus  vindi- 
cating the  Church  of  England,  and  rebuking  Rome,  he  equally 
vindicates  the  presbyterian  church  and  condemns  the  conduct  of 
the  prelacy. 

Our  reply,  therefore,  to  the  question,  are  we  schismatics  ?  — 
is,  that  we  are  not ;  and  sufficient  grounds  for  this  opinion  have, 
we  trust,  been  given.  To  the  second  question  —  are  the  up- 
holders of  this  doctrine  of  prelatical  succession  schismatical  ?  — 
our  reply  is,  that  they  are  ;  and  our  reasons  for  this  conclusion, 
will  be  advanced  in  our  next  lecture. 


LECTURE   XIX. 


THE     PRELATIC  DOCTRINE  OF    APOSTOLICAL    SUCCESSION    SCHISMATICAL. 

Having  laid  down  the  true  doctrine  of  schism,  as  described 
in  the  word  of  God,  and  liaving  vindicated  the  presbyterian 
church  from  its  imputation,  we  now  proceed  to  show  that  this 
doctrine  of  prelatic  apostolical  succession  is  schismatical  in  its 
character  and  tendency.  Let  it,  however,  be  first  observed,  that 
a  body  may  be  justly  chargeable  with  the  guilt  of  schism,  while 
yet  it  retains  the  name,  the  form,  the  ordinances,  and  all  the 
external  marks  and  tokens  of  a  visible  church  of  Christ.  This 
is  most  evident  from  the  fact  that  the  Jewish  church,  while 
yet  retaining  its  antiquity,  its  unity,  its  succession,  its  priesthood, 
with  the  oracles  and  ordinances  of  God,  is  nevertheless  proved 
by  the  apostle  Paul  in  his  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  to  have  been 
broken  off  from  the  true  church,  and  thus  excommunicated  by 
God,  because  of  unbelief.  While  the  Jewish  was  actually 
boasting  that  it  was  the  only  true  and  catholic  church  of  God,  it 
had  become  apostate  and  therefore  excommunicate.  And,  in 
like  manner,  is  it  possible  that  this  charge  may,  in  a  measure, 
lie  against  the  prelacy,  even  while  it  proclaims  to  the  world,  in 
a  spirit  of  equal  intolerance  and  lofty  pretension,  the  same  ex- 
clusive claims  to  be  the  true,  and  only,  church  of  God. 

But  further,  it  is  not  less  clear,  from  holy  scripture,  that  this 
guilt  of  schism  may  attach  itself  not  merely  to  the  apostolic  and 
visible  church  of  Corinth,  but  also  to  the  church  of  Rome,  upon 
whose  succession  the  entire  claims  of  the  Anglican  prelacy  must 
necessarily  rest.  In  the  Epistle  of  Paul,  addressed  to  that 
church  in  its  first  and  purest  form,  he  solenmly  warns  it,  by  the 
example  of  the  Jewish  church,  to  beware,  lest,  by  a  similar 
apostacy  firom  the  feith,  and  a  like  arrogant  assumption  of  supre- 

59 


466  HOW   FAR   THE    PRELACY   IS    SCHISMATICAL.      [LECT.  XIX. 

macy,  it  also  should  be  cut  off.  (Rom.  ii.  22.)  "Behold,"  says  the 
apostle,  "  the  goodness  and  severity  of  God ;  on  them  who  fell 
severity,  but  towards  thee  goodness,  if  thou  continue  in  his 
goodness,  —  otherwise  thou  also  shalt  be  cut  off." 
Similar  also,  are  the  forewarnings  delivered  by  divine  authority 
to  the  seven  apostolic  churches  of  Asia,  as  emblematic  of  all 
others  in  every  age  and  country.    (Rev.  chapters  2nd  and  3rd.) 

It  is,  therefore,  most  clear  and  indubitable,  that  the  mere  fact 
of  its  existence  in  a  visible  and  organized  church  state,  having 
all  the  external  marks  of  a  church,  does  not  by  any  means 
prevent  the  application  to  the  prelacy  of  this  charge  of  schism. 

We  proceed  to  state,  that  this  crime  of  schism,  although 
necessarily  sinful,  in  all  its  forms,  is  not  in  every  degree  of 
heinousness,  exclusive  of  God's  promises,  or  sufficient  to  cut  off 
the  guilty  church  from  the  communion  and  privileges  of  Christ's 
body.  This  certainly  was  not  the  case  with  the  Corinthian 
church,  although  it  is  most  assuredly  condemned  for  its  schisraat- 
ical  procedure.  Nor  was  it  otherwise  when  at  a  later  period, 
Clemens  Romanus  addressed  his  epistle  to  this  same  church, 
and  rebuked  them  for  the  continuance  among  them,  of  this  same 
unhappy  and  destructive  spirit. 

In  alleging,  then,  against  the  prelatical  communion  the  certain 
charge  of  schism,  we  are  far  from  designing  thereby,  to  implicate 
it  in  such  a  degree  of  criminality  as  to  imply  open  apostacy,  or 
the  loss  of  the  true  character  and  privileges  of  a  church  of 
Christ.  We  do  not  deny  the  being  —  the  esse  — the  form  — 
even  of  the  Roman  catholic,  as  a  church  of  Christ;  although 
we  certainly  deny  it  to  be — bene  esse — or  in  a  state  of  well- 
being.  We  do  not  question  the  church  standing,  character,  and 
privileges  of  the  Anglican  communion  ;  and  much  less  is  it  our 
desire  to  throw  any  doubt  over  the  character,  as  a  true  church 
of  Jesus  Christ  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  these 
United  States  of  America.  We  do  not  sit  in  judgment  upon 
the  character  or  claims,  the  merits  or  demerits,  of  these  churches 
of  Christ.  We  do  not  determine  the  nature  and  amount  of  that 
criminality  under  which  they  severally  lie,  in  pretending  to  a 
spiritual  supremacy  over  other  denominations.  But  since  we 
are  condemned  as  sectarians  and  schismatics  ;  since  we  are 
held  forth  as  justly  excluded  from  the  one,  holy,  catholic,  and 
apostolic  church ;  we  plead  not  guilty  to  the  libel.  We  repel 
the  injustice  of  the  offensive  imputation.  We  repudiate  the 
pharisaic  intolerance  and  illiberality  of  those,  who  in  this  age, 
and  in  this  country,  create,  foster,  and  re-animate  feuds,  ani- 
mosities, alienations,  and  strifes,  among  those  who  should  be 
found  dwelling  together  as  brethren  in  the  Lord,  and  as  heirs 
together  to  the  same  divine  inheritance. 


LECT.  XIX.]    PRELATISTS  SCHISMATICAL  BY  THEIR  OWN  SHOWING.     467 

We  are,  therefore,  compelled  to  show,  that  whatever  schism 
may  be  justly  chargeable  upon  our  isolation,  and  inharmonious 
estrangement  from  one  another,  is  to  be  laid  to  the  account  of 
prelacy  and  not  of  presbytery  ;  —  of  the  Roman  and  Anglican 
communions,  and  not  of  the  presbyterian  church.  But  as  to 
the  degree  of  that  criminality,  in  which  these  churches  are 
involved,  we  leave  all  judgment  with  Him  to  whom,  as  the 
Head  of  the  church,  it  has  been  wisely  and  graciously  com- 
mitted. 

Do  prelatists  demand  the  subjection  of  all  other  churches,  to 
their  ecclesiastical  sway  ? — they  thereby  violate  the  unity  of 
that  catholic  liberty,  with  which  Christ  has  made  his  churches 
free.  Do  they  declare  that  to  be  necessary,  which  was  not 
made  necessary  by  the  teaching  of  the  apostles,  or  by  the  most 
ancient  creeds  ?  —  then  do  they  violate  the  unity  of  catholic 
faith.  Do  they  refuse  to  receive,  and  associate  with  us,  as 
christian  ministers,  and  as  christian  men,  except  upon  terms  not 
prescribed  or  authorized  by  God's  word  ?  —  then  do  they  violate 
the  spirit  of  catholic  communion.  So  that  theirs  is  not  the 
catholic,  but  only  the  Anglican  or  the  Roman  communion. 

In  further  establishing  this  charge  against  the  prelatic  doctrine 
of  apostolical  succession,  we  will  first  show  that  it  follows  from 
their  own  definitions  of  schism. 

"  Schism,  then,"  says  Stilhngfleet,'  "  as  it  imports  a  separation 
from  communion  with  a  church  society,  is  not  a  thing  intrinsically 
and  formally  evil  in  itself,  but  it  is  capable  of  the  differences  of 
good  and  evil,  according  to  the  grounds,  reasons,  ends  and  cir- 
cumstances, inducing  to  such  a  separation.  The  withdrawment 
from  society  is  but  the  materiality  of  schism ;  the  formality  of  it 
must  be  fetched  from  the  grounds  on  which  that  is  built." 

This  same  writer,  after  quoting  the  opinion  of  the  Reverend 
Mr.  Hales,  says  :^ 

"  And  so  that  learned  and  rational  author  there  fully  proves, 
that  those  who  require  unlawful  and  unnecessary  conditions  of 
communion,  must  take  the  imputation  of  schism  upon  them- 
selves, by  making  separation  from  them  just  and  necessary." 

"  Where  any  church  retaining  purity  of  doctrine,  doth  require 
the  owning  of,  and  conforming  to,  any  unlawful  or  suspected 
practice,  men  may  lawfully  deny  conformity  to,  and  communion 
with,  that  church  in  such  things,  without  incurring  the  guilt  of 
schism." 

"  That  the  pope's  usurpation  mainly  lies  in  imposing  things 
upon  men's  consciences  as  necessary,  which  are  doubtful  or  un- 

1)  Iren.  p.  108.  2)  Irenicum, pp.  108, 116, 117, 118, 

119, 124. 


468  PRELATICAL  DEFINITIONS   OF   SCHISM.  [LECT.  XIX. 

lawful,  and,  wherever  the  same  thing  is  done,  there  is  an  usurp- 
ation of  the  same  nature,  though  not  in  so  high  a  degree  ;  and 
it  may  be  as  lawful  to  withdraw  communion  from  one  as  well  as 
the  other." 

"  So  that  let  men  turn  and  wander  which  way  they  will,  by 
the  same  arguments  that  any  will  prove  separation  from  the 
church  of  Rome  lawful,  because  she  required  unlawful  things, 
as  conditions  of  her  communion,  it  will  be  proved  lawful,  not  to 
conform  to  any  suspected  or  unlawful  practices  required  by  any 
church  governors  upon  the  same  terms  ;  if  the  thing  so  required 
be,  after  a  serious  and  sober  inquiry,  judged  unwarrantable  by  a 
man's  own  conscience." 

"  Unless  others  proceed  to  eject  and  cast  them  wholly  out  of 
communion  on  that  account,  in  which  case  their  separation  is 
necessary,  and  their  schism  unavoidable." 

So,  also.  Bishop  Hoadly,  in  his  reasons  for  conformity  to 
the  Church  of  England,'  says:  "  If  your  separation  from  the 
Church  of  England  be  not  necessary,  you  acknowledge  it  to  be 
schismatical.  If  it  be,  we  acknowledge  it  not  to  be  schismat- 
ical." 

So,  also,  speaks  the  Rev.  Mr.  Hales,  "  as  learned  and  judi- 
cious a  divine  as  our  nation  hath  bred,"  as  Stillingfleet  thought,'^ 
in  his  tract  on  schism,  which,  according  to  the  same  eminent 
divine,  exhibits  such  "  wisdom,  judgment  and  moderation."^ 

"  Schism,  I  say,  upon  the  very  sound  of  the  word,  imports  divis- 
ion: division  is  not,  but  where  communion  is  or  ought  to  be." 

"  Yet  the  great  benefit  of  communion,  notwithstanding,  in 
regard  of  divers  distempers  men  are  subject  to,  dissension  and 
disunion  are  often  necessary  ;  for  when  either  false  or  uncertain 
conclusions  are  obtruded  for  truth,  and  acts  either  unlawful  or 
ministering  just  scruple  are  required  of  us  to  be  performed  ;  in 
those  cases,  consent  were  conspiracy,  and  open  contestation  is 
not  faction  or  schism,  but  due  christian  animosity." 

"  First :  there  is  a  schism  in  which  only  one  party  is  the 
schismatic :  for  where  cause  of  schism  is  necessary,  there,  not 
he  that  separates,  but  he  that  occasions  the  separation,  is  the 
schismatic." 

"  Second  :  there  is  a  schism  in  which  both  parts  are  the  schis- 
matics ;  for  where  the  occasion  of  separation  is  unnecessary, 
neither  side  can  be  excused  from  the  guilt  of  schism." 

1)  See  Wks  fol  vol.  i.  p.  297.  of  "  Golden   Remaias."    The   very 

2)  Iren.  p.  120.  highest  character  is  given  of  him  by 

3)  Ibid,  p.  121.  The  cognomen  of  Clarendon,  (see  Life,  vol.  i.  pp.  27, 
'  ever-tnemorable  '  ie  given  to  Hales  28,)  and  by  Bishop  Gibson.  See  pref. 
by  immemorial  and  universal  usage,  to  hia  Golden  Remains. 

and  hia  pieces  are  known  by  the  title 


LECT.  XIX.]        THE    EVER-MEMOKABLE    HALES    ON    SCHISM.  469 

"  You  shall  find  that  all  schisms  have  crept  into  the  church 
by  one  of  these  three  ways;  either  upon  matter  of  fact,  or  mat- 
ter of  opinion,  or  point  of  ambition.  For  the  first,  1  call  that 
matter  of  fact  when  something  is  required  to  be  done  by  us  which 
we  either  know,  or  strongly  suspect,  to  be  unlawful.  So  the 
first  notable  schism  of  which  we  read  in  the  church  contained  in 
it  matter  of  fact ;  for  it  being  upon  error  taken  for  necessary  that 
an  Easter  must  be  kept,  and  upon  worse  than  error,  if  I  may  so 
speak,  (for  it  was  no  less  than  a  point  of  Judaism  forced  upon 
the  church,)  upon  worse  than  error,  I  say,  thought  further  neces- 
sary, that  the  ground  for  the  time  of  our  keeping  that  feast  must 
be  the  rule  left  by  Moses  to  the  Jews,  there  arose  a  stout  ques- 
tion,—  whether  we  were  to  celebrate  with  the  Jews,  on  the 
fourteenth  moon,  or  the  Sunday  following?  " 

Again  :  "  Come  we  now  to  consider  a  little  of  the  second  sort 
of  schism,  arising  upon  occasion  of  variety  of  opinion.  It  hath 
been  the  common  disease  of  christians,  from  the  beginning,  not 
to  content  themselves  with  that  measure  of  faith  which  God  and 
the  scriptures  have  expressly  afforded  us ;  but  out  of  a  vain 
desire  to  know  more  than  is  revealed,  they  have  attempted  to 
discuss  things  of  which  we  can  have  no  light,  neither  from  rea- 
son, nor  revelation  :  neither  have  they  rested  here,  but  upon 
pretence  of  church-authority,  which  is  none,  or  tradition,  which 
for  the  most  part  is  but  figment,  they  have  peremptorily  con- 
cluded, and  confidently  imposed  upon  others,  a  necessity  of 
entertaining  conclusions  of  that  nature  ;  and  to  strengthen  them- 
selves have  broken  out  into  divisions  and  factions,  opposing  man 
to  man,  synod  to  synod,  till  the  peace  of  the  church  vanished, 
without  all  possibility  of  recall.  Hence  arose  those  ancient 
and  many  separations  amongst  christians,  occasioned  by  Arian- 
ism,  Eutychianism,  Nestorianism,  Photinianism,  Sabellianism, 
and  many  more,  both  ancient  and  in  our  time  ;  all  which,  indeed, 
are  but  names  of  schism,  howsoever,  in  the  common  language 
of  the  fathers,  they  weie  called  heresies." 

"The  third  thing  I  noted  for  matter  of  schism  was  ambition  ; 
I  mean  episcopal  ambition  showing  itself,  especially  in  two  heads  : 
one  concerning  plurality  of  bishops  in  the  same  see  ;  another, 
the  superiority  of  bishops  in  divers  sees.  Aristotle  tells  us,  that 
necessity  causeth  but  small  faults,  but  avarice  and  ambition  were 
the  mothers  of  great  crimes.  Episcopal  ambition  hath  made 
this  true  ;  for  no  occasion  hath  produced  more  frequent,  more 
continuing,  more  sanguinary  schisms  than  this  hath  done.  The 
sees  of  Alexander,  of  Constantinople,  of  Antioch,  and  above 
all,  of  Rome,  do  abundantly  show  thus  much  ;  and  our  ecclesi- 
astical stories  witness  no  less,  of  which  the  greatest  part  con- 


470  PRELATISTS  SELF-CONDEMNED  AS  SCHISMATICS.    [lECT.  XIX. 

sists  in  the  factionating  and  tumultuating  of  great  and  potent 
bishops.  Socrates,  apologizing  for  himself,  that  professing  to 
write  an  ecclesiastical  story,  he  did  oftentimes  interlace  the 
actions  of  secular  princes,  and  other  civil  businesses,  tells  us  that 
he  did  thus  to  refresh  his  readers,  who  otherwise  were  in  dan- 
ger to  be  cloyed  by  reading  so  much  of  the  acts  of  unquiet  and 
unruly  bishops." 

<'  But  that  other  head  of  episcopal  ambition,  concerning  su- 
premacy of  bishops  in  divers  sees,  one  claiming  superiority  over 
another,  as  it  hath  been,  from  time  to  time,  a  great  trespasser 
against  the  church's  peace,  so  it  is  now  the  final  ruin  of  it ;  the 
east  and  the  west,  through  the  fury  of  the  two  prime  bishops, 
being  irremediably  separated  without  all  hope  of  reconcilement." 
Such  are  the  sentiments  of  Mr.  Hales. 

Again:  "  Schism,"  says  Mr.  Jones,^  "is  the  sin  of  making  a 
division  in  the  church,  and  separating  ourselves  from  it."  Of 
course,  the  sin  lies  at  the  door  of  them  by  whom  that  division 
is  made  necessary ;  for  as  it  is  absurd  to  say  the  majority  must 
necessarily  be  right,  when  the  standard  of  right  is  not  the  wis- 
dom of  man,  but  the  sure  teaching  of  God,  the  separated  party 
may  not  be  the  separating  body  ;  and  the  whole  guilt  may  attach 
itself  to  the  many  and  not  to  the  few. 

Once  more :  "  Who,"  asks  Bishop  Hobart,  in  his  "  Church 
Catechism,"^  "are  schismatics? 

"  They  are  schismatics  who,  in  any  thing  essential,  depart 
from  the  ministry,  sacraments,  and  worship  established  in  the 
church,  or  who  create  division  in  the  church." 

Now,  it  is  an  indisputable  fact,  that  the  portion  of  the  Eng- 
lish church,  which  came  to  be  distinguished  by  the  name  of 
Puritans,  was  originally  composed  of  the  members  and  minis- 
ters of  that  church;  —  that  their  object  and  design  was,  not  its 
injury,  but  its  more  complete  and  perfect  reformation,  according 
to  the  desires  of  its  earliest  and  best  fathers  ;  —  that  they  strongly 
repudiated  this  charge  of  schism ;  and  that  they  had  no  antici- 
pation of  any  actual  separation,  until  they  were  required  either 
to  belie  their  own  consciences,  or  to  leave  the  bosom  of  their 
beloved  church.^ 

1)  The  Churchman's  Catec.  Wks.  See  the  Address  of  the  Essex  Minis- 
vol.  ii.  p.  427.  ters  in  Price's  Hist,  of  Prot.  Nonconf. 

2)  P.  44.  vol.  i.  p.  330.     See  also  ibid,  pp.  322, 

3)  See  Hanbury's  Hooker,  vol.  i.  206.  In  the  first  directory,  drawn  up 
p.  393;  Pierce's  Vind.  of  Dissent.  by  Cartwright,  the  Puritans  protest 
Calamy's  Defence  of  Nonconf  vol.  against  "  the  calumny  of  schism." 
iii.  p.  198,  I.i0nd.  1705,  205 ;  Trough-  Price's  Nonconf.  vol.  i.  p.  3G7.  The 
ton's  Apology  for  Nonconf.  p.  107 ;  charge  deprecated  by  Cartwright  and 
Baxter's  Five  Disputations  on  Ch.  Iiis  fellow  prisoners  in  1592.  Price's 
Gov.  Arg.    3,    Disp.   i.  p.   37,  &c.  Nonconf.  vol.  i.  p.  395;    and  by  Bar- 


LECT.  XIX.]     PRELATISTS — NOT  THE  PURITANS — SCHISMATICS.  471 

Their  withdrawment  from  the  communion  of  the  Church  of 
England,  was  forced  upon  the  Puritans,  by  the  prelatic,  or  rather 
the  royal  party,  who  acted  under  the  influence  of  the  crown, 
in  opposition  to  the  more  enlightened  policy  of  some  of  the 
wisest  members  of  the  hierarchy.  This  party  required  the  be- 
lief of  what  were  regarded  great  and  serious  errors.  That 
whole  system  of  doctrine  and  practice,  which  was  developed  by 
Archbishop  Laud,  and  which  is  noio  maintained  by  the  Oxford 
divines  and  other  high-churchmen,  we  cannot  but  consider,  as 
did  our  nonconforming  fathers,  as  essentially  popish.  This 
system,  we  must,  with  them,  believe  to  be  unscriptural,  and  con- 
sequently, unwarrantable  and  dangerous.  To  enforce,  therefore, 
the  belief  of  such  tenets,  was  to  make  resistance  a  duty,  and 
compliance  a  sin.  And  the  Church  of  England,  in  sternly  in- 
sisting upon  entire  conformity  to  her  views,  was  eminently  schis- 


row,  Greenwood  and  Perry,  in  1593. 
See  ibid,  pp.  419,  423.  So  also  in  the 
Millenary  petition,  presented  by  the 
Puritans  to  James  I.  See  ibid,  p.  451. 
So  again  under  the  despotic  reign  of 
Bancroft,  ib.  p.  504, 508.  See  Johnson's 
strong  disavowal  of  the  appropriate- 
ness of  this  charge  in  his  letter  to  Bp. 
Sandys.  Price's  Hist  of  Prot.  Nori- 
conf.  vol.  i.  p.  273.  Sampson  and  the 
early  Puritans  charged  the  prelacy 
with  schism  in  enforcing  as  necessary 
what  could  not  be  shown  to  be  arti- 
cles of  faith,  and  yet  allowing  no  lib- 
erty of  nonconformity,  or  separate 
worship.  See  Soames'  Eliz.  Rel.  Hist, 
p.  53 ;  Price's  Hist.  Nonconf.  vol.  i. 
p.  181.  See  the  nonconformists  de,- 
fended  against  the  charge  of  schism, 
in  Owen's  Wks.  vol.  xix.  pp.  5G9- 
616.  .  See  also  Dr.  Owen's  full  An- 
swer to  Stillingfleet  on  the  unreason- 
ableness of  separation.  Wks.  vol.  xx. 
p.  279.  See  this  subject  also  fully 
treated  in  Plain  Deahng  Defended, 
&c.  Lond.  1716,  and  Lay  Nonconf. 
Justified,  &c.  by  Mr.  Grove,  Lond. 
1717,  Gth  edit.  "A  conference  be- 
tween E.  and  D.  or  a  member  of  the 
Church  of  England  and  a  Dissenter 
&c."  Lond.  1718.  See  Matthew  Hen- 
ry's Sermon,  "  The  Christian  Religion 
not  a  Sect,  and  yet  that  it  is  every 
where  spoken  against."  Wks.  Lond. 
1830,  p.  314.  Baxter  wrote  a  treatise, 
entitled  A  Search  for  the  English 
Schismatic,  (4to.  1681,)  of  which  he 
gives  himself  the  following  account, 
(Life,  pt  iii.  pp.  188, 189,  in  Life  by 
Orme,  p.  636.)    "  Because  the  accusa- 


tion of  schism  is  it  that  maketh  all  the 
noise  against  the  nonconformists  in 
the  mouths  of  their  persecutors,  I 
wrote  a  few  sheets  called  A  Search 
for  the  English  Schismatic,  compar- 
ing the  principles  and  practices  of 
both  parties,  and  leaving  it  to  the 
reader  to  judge  who  is  the  schismat- 
ic ;  showing  that  the  prelatists  have, 
in  their  canons,  ipso  facto  excommu- 
nicated all  the  nobility,  gentry,  cler- 
gy, and  people,  who  do  but  affirm, 
tliat  there  is  any  thing  sinful  in  their 
liturgy,  ceremonies,  or  church-gov- 
ernment, even  the  lowest  officer. 
Their  laws  cast  us  out  of  the  minis- 
try into  gaols,  and  then  they  call  us 
schismatics,  for  not  coming  to  their 
churches ;  yea,  though  we  come  to 
them  constantly,  as  1  have  done,  if 
we  will  not  give  over  preaching  our- 
selves, wiien  the  parishes  I  lived  in 
had,  one  fifty  thousand,  the  other 
twenty  thousand  souls  in  it,  more 
than  could  come  within  the  church 
doors.  This  book,  also,  and  my  Prog- 
nostication, and  what  I  valued  most, 
my  True  and  Only  Way  of  Universal 
Concord,  were  railed  at,  but  never 
answered,  that  1  know  of."  See  this 
subject,  as  it  regards  the  reformed 
churches,  fully  discussed  by  Voetius, 
in  his  Desperata  Causa  Papatus. 
Amst.  1635,  Libri  Tertii.  §  111,  p. 
693,  &c.  '•■  Scisma  est,  cum  in  fide 
consontientos  alii  aliis  hominibus  vel 
exclusis  ritibus  ita  sunt  addicti,  ut 
animis  et  studiis  propterea  dissideant 
et  factiones  ineant."  p.  698. 


472 


PRELACY    THE   PARENT    OF    ALL   SECTS.  [lECT.  XIX. 


matical,  and  the  just  cause  of  that  division,  and  of  all  the  evils 
which  ensued.' 

And  inasmuch  as  these  same  unscriptural  doctrines  and  prac- 


1)  The  sentiments  of  Mr.  Isaac 
Taylor  have  been  already  given  in 
Lect  xiii.  307.  "  I  think  it  (dissent) 
is  an  evil,  which  we  have  in  a  great 
measure  brought  upon  ourselves  by 
past  pertinacity  and  remissness,"  says 
the  Rev.  G.  Hodson,  M.  A.  Archdea- 
con of  Stafford. 

Lord  Bacon  prophesied  to  his  sov- 
ereign, James  VI.  that  the  first  violent 
attempts  that  should  be  made  to  estab- 
lish uniformity  would  prove  fatal  to 
unity,  and  rend  the  church  in  pieces, 
a  prediction  signally  fulfilled  in  the 
reign  of  that  prince's  grandson.  That 
all  the  sects  in  England  are  traceable 
to  the  prelacy,  so  that  she  was  "  the 
mother  of  them  all,"  may  be  seen  af- 
firmed in  the  Dissuasive  from  the 
Errors  of  the  Time,  by  the  Rev  Rob- 
ert Bay  he,  Lond.  4to.  1645,  p.  7, 
where  he  says, "  all  of  them  were  bred 
and  born  under  the  wings  of  no  other 
dame  than  episcopacy."  See  also  pp. 
10,12 

"  Not  chargeable  on  the  dissenters, 
but  undoubtedly  on  the  church  " 
See  proved  in  Towgood's  Dissent 
Justified,  Lond.  1811,  ed.  12th,  pp. 
23-27,79-83,124,160-165. 

"  But  who,  at  present,"  asks  the 
authors  of  The  Plea  for  Presbytery, 
(Glasgow,  1840,  pp.  128,  121),)  "are 
the  sectaries  ?  Does  the  designation 
apply  to  all  who  refuse  to  yield  an 
implicit  obedience  to  the  decisions  of 
an  act  of  Parliament  .■"  Can  a  lay 
legislature  pronounce  an  infallible 
judgment  upon  a  question  of  schism  ? 
If  so,  what  is  orthodox  in  Edinburgh 
must  be  heretical  in  London.  You 
speak  of  the  '  endless  ramifications  of 
dissent,'  as  '  the  scandal  of  protest- 
antism,' but  you  would  have  express- 
ed yourself  more  correctly  had  you 
said  that  they  are  the  repi-uuch  of  the 
Church  of  England.  She  has  created 
separation  to  a  greater  extent,  and  in 
more  varied  forms,  than  any  other 
protestant  church  in  Christendom. 
Hiid  it  not  been  for  the  immense  ad- 
vantages which  an  establishment 
confers,  she  might  long  since  have 
been  swallowed  up  by  the  very  evil 
she  has  generated.  By  her  despotic 
constitution  and  her  unwarrantable 
ceremonies,  she  has  driven  from  her 


pale  thousands  and  tens  of  thousands, 
of  the  most  pious  and  enlightened  of 
British  protestants.  When  the  act  of 
uniformity  was  passed,  it  was  not 
without  weighty  reasons,  that,  in  a 
single  day,  two  thousand  of  the  most 
learned  and  godly  ministers  that  ever 
adorned  a  christian  church,  resigned 
their  livings,  and  retired  from  her 
communion.  She  has  never  exhibit- 
ed any  symptom  of  contrition  for  that 
foul  violation  of  the  rights  of  con- 
science ;  and,  until  she  assume  the 
attitude  of  repentance  and  reform,  the 
reasons  for  dissent  must  remain  obvi- 
ous and  unanswerable.  Let  the 
people  be  permitted  to  elect  their 
pastors,  let  the  ancient  government 
of  the  church  by  presbyteries  and 
synods  be  restored ;  and  let  faithful 
men,  met  in  her  ecclesiastical  assem- 
blies, be  allowed  to  cut  off  with  an 
unsparing  hand,  whatever  is  amiss  in 
her  constitution  and  her  ceremonies, 
and  then  she  will  have  made  an  ef- 
fectual movement  for  the  suppression 
of  dissent.  You  may,  perliaps,  tell 
me  that  presbyterianism  in  Scotland 
is  split  up  into  many  sections,  but  I 
can  reply,  that  secession  there  is 
neither  so  rampant  nor  so  varied  as  in 
Enirland.  Had  the  Scottish  church 
adhered  closely  to  her  own  formula- 
ries, dissent  would  have  been  almost 
unknown  i  .  North  Britain.  In  as  far 
as  principle  is  concerned,  the  great 
mass  of  the  Scottish  people  are  per- 
fectly agreed  in  doctrine,  government, 
and  worship.  And  now  that  the 
Scottish  establishment  is  exhibiting 
the  spirit  of  the  olden  time,  and  faith- 
fully recurring  to  her  ancient  stand- 
ards, I  rejoice  to  see  that  those  who 
seceded  from  her  in  her  period  of  de- 
fection, are  again  lifting  up  their 
hands  to  bless  her,  and  returning  to 
the  bosom  of  their  venerable  parent." 
Among  the  illustrations  of  schism 
given  by  Matthew  Henry,  in  his 
Brief  Inq.  into  the  nature  of  Schism 
(Lond.  1717,  p.  17,)  is  '•  concluding 
hardly  as  to  the  spiritual  slate  and 
condition  of  those  that  differ  from  us, 
excluding  tliein  out  of  the  church, 
and  from  salvation,  because  they  are 
not  just  of  our  mind  in  every  punc- 
tilio."    Witness  that  notion,   which 


LECT.  XIX.]  PEELATIC    EXCLUSIVENESS    IS    SCHISM. 


473 


tices,  are  now  pertinaciously  advanced,  and  are  also  held  forth 
as  the  just  and  necessary  inferences  from  this  elemental  truth  — 
the  apostolical  succession;  we  are  hence  led  to  the  conclusion 
that  this  doctrine  is  schismatical,  and  its  upholders  justly  charge- 
ahle  with  the  guilt  of  schism. 

Besides,  this  doctrine,  and  these,  its  associated  errors,  are,  by 
their  abettors,  enrolled  among  the  articles  of  faith.  They  are 
declared  to  be  "of  the  substance  of  the  faith,"  and  therefore, 
essential  as  terms  of  communion  with  the  church  of  Christ.  On 
the  contrary,  in  unison  with  a  large  portion  of  the  Church  of 
England,  and  its  most  judicious  divines,  we  believe  that  such 
doctrines  never  can  be  proved  from  scripture,  and  that  they  may 
not  be  held  as  terms  of  christian  communion,  and  therefore  that 
to  enforce  them  as  such,  is  schism.^ 

Still  further,  the  advocates  of  this  system  anathematize  and 
exclude  from  ail  covenanted  mercy,  those  who  cannot  conscien- 
tiously receive  their  unscriptural  and  unsubstantiated  dogmas  as 
true,  and  much  less  as  fundamentally  necessary.  Now,  that 
this  conduct  is  most  plain  and  palpable  schism,  we  will  prove 
out  of  their  own  writers.  "  None  of  us,"  says  Bishop  Bull,  in 
his  Vindication  of  the  Church  of  England,*  "  do  affirm  that  our 
church  is  the  only  true  church  ;  for  that  would  be  a  schismatical 
assertion,  like  that  of  the  Donatists  of  old,  and  the  papists  now- 
a-days,  and  the  hii^hest  breach  of  charity,  in  damning  all  the 
christian  world  besides  ourselves." 

Such,   also,   is   the  opinion  of  Dr.  Field,  in  his  work  on  the 


excludes  out  of  the  church,  and  con- 
sequently out  of  heaven,  all  those^ 
(how  orthodox  and  serious  soever 
they  are  otherwise,)  who  are  not  in 
prelatical  comniunion  ;  if  no  diocesan 
bishops,  then  no  ministers,  no  sacra- 
ments, no  church,  no  salvation, 
which  is  certainly  the  most  schis- 
matical notion  that  ever  was  broached 
in  the  christian  world." 

1)  See  Lects.  ii.  iii.  an<I  iv.  and 
p.  56.  Also  Unity  and  Scliism,  pp. 
25,  2d,  29,  by  the  author  of  Hours  of 
Thought,  Lond.  183ei ;  Spiritual 
Despot,  p.  426;  Bp.  Bull's  Vind.  of 
Ch  of  Engl.  pp.  105.  113,  114,  115, 
149,  117,  167  See  this  fully  shown  in 
Burnet  on  30  Art.  Page's  ed.  p.  100; 
ISote  froui  Stiliingfleet,  and  also  pp. 
486,  468,  and  in  Chillingworth's  Wks. 
vol.  i.  pp.  66,  108,  lOy,  (3  vol.  Eng. 
edit.) 

"  The   spirit  of  schism,  (Oxf.  Tr. 
vol.  i.  p.  423,)  in  addition  to  its  other 

60 


inherent  characters  of  sin,  implies  the 
desire  of  establishing  minor  points  as 
catholic  or  essential  points,  or  the 
spirit  of  exclusiveness."  Laud,  how- 
ever, claims  equal  power  to  legislate 
for  the  church  with  the  apostles.  See 
on  Liturgy  and  Episcop.  pp.  42,  46. 
Thiis.also,  the  second  council  of  Nice 
determined  tiiat  the  synod  which  de- 
creed the  propriety  of  image  worship, 
to  be  schismatical.  and  not  they  who 
resisted  that  decree,  and  on  these 
grounds,  as  expressed  by  Hales, 
(see  in  Iren.  p.  120.)  "  First,  because 
it  is  acknowledged  by  all,  that  it  is 
unnecessary.  Secondly,  it  is  by  most 
suspected.  Thirdly,  it  is  by  many 
held  utterly  unlawful.  Can,  then, 
eaith  he,  the  enjoying  of  such  a  thing 
be  aught  else  but  abuse  ?  or  can  the 
refusal  of  communion  here  be  thought 
any  other  thing  than  duty  .'  " 
2)  P.  66,  Oxf.  edit. 


474  PRELATIC   EXCLUSIVENESS    IS    SCHISM,  [lECT.  XII. 

church.'  "  Ye  are  to  be  charired  with  donatism,  who  deny  all 
christian  societies  in  the  w^orld  to  be  where  the  pope's  feet  are 
not  kissed,  to  pertain  to  the  true  church  of  God,  and  so  cast 
into  hell  all  the  churches  of  Ethiopia,  Armenia,  Syria,  Graecia, 
Russia."^ 

Hear,  also.  Bishop  Sherlock  in  his  Examination  of  the  Notes 
of  the  Church.^  "  For  every  church  wdiich  professes  the  true 
catholic  faith,  and  imposes  only  catholic  terms  of  communion,  and 
is  ready,  out  of  the  principles  of  brotherly  love  and  charity 
(that  cement  of  catholic  communion)  to  communicate  with  all 
churches,  and  to  receive  all  churches  to  her  communion  upon 
these  terms,  is  a  truly  catholic  church." 

Sir  Peter  King  thus  gives  his  judgment :  "  Whosoever  im- 
posed," says  he,  —  after  showing  that  conformity  in  rites  and  cus- 
toms, or  in  points  considered  non-essential,  was  not  required  by 
the  primitive  churches,  —  "  on  particular  churches  the  observance 
of  the  former  of  these  two  things,  or  on  particular  persons  the 
belief  of  the  latter,  they  were  esteemed  not  as  preservers  and 
maintainers,  but  as  violaters  and  breakers  of  the  churches'  unity 
and  concord."* 

From  all  that  has  been  adduced,  it  is  therefore  evident,  that 
by  the  definitions  of  schism,  given  by  prelatists  themselves,  this 
doctrine  and  its  abettors  must  be  adjudged  to  be  schismatical. 

But  there  is  another  view  of  schism  from  which  this  conclu- 
sion will  as  certainly  follow.  Schism  has  been  recently  defined  by 
an  American  divine,  to  be  "  opposition  to  previously  existing 
churches  ;  "^  and  on  this  basis  schism  is  charged  upon  the  Ameri- 
can Roman  catholic  church. 

Now  if  the  term  schism  is  to  be  understood  as  meaning  separ- 

1)  B.  iii.  ch.  xxviii.  in  Ruther-  tuted  church,  and  apostolic  succes- 
ford's  Due  Plight,  p.  62.  s-ion  of  clero-y,  on  the  contrary,  is  not 

2)  See  exactly  similar  senti-  only  absurd,  as  we  have  already 
ments,  in  Bishop  Morton's  Grand  shown  it  to  be,  but  it  counteracts 
Imposture,  ch.  xiv.  p.  2  ;  Challenge,  christian  charity,  engenders  pride  and 
p.  3-12,  in  ibid.  See  also  the  language  bigotry.  It  has  thrown  the  English 
of  Mr.  Hales,  as  quoted  above.  church  out  of  communion  with  prot- 

See    also    Bishop    Patrick,    in  his  estant  churches,  and  has  arrayed  her 

Christian  Sacrifice,   pp.  61,  70.     Bp.  on   the  side   of  the   Romish  church, 

Sherlock,  in  Notes  of  the  Church  Ex-  under  circumstances  highly   prejudi- 

am.  pp.  13,10,29,32.     See  also  Har-  cial  to  the  principles  of  true  chris- 

ris's  Union,  pp.  99-  102,  Am.  ed.  127,  tianity" 

226.  and  Chrysostom  and  Cyprian  in  3)  Notes  of  the  Ch.  Ex.  p.  13,  and 

ibid,  pp  64,  Go.     Also,  Robert  Hall's  see  pp.  30,  32,  33. 
Wks.  8vo.  ed.  Engl.  vol.  ii.  pp.  82, 85,  4)  See  on  the  Primit.  Church. 

gC,  ci8.  5)  Rev.  John  Coleman  in  Faber's 

This    charge     is    distinctly    made  DifF.  of  Rom.  pp.  277,  278,  as  edited 

ao-ainst  this  system  in  an  able  review  by    him.     See    also  Perceval  on  Ap. 

of  the  Tracts  for  the  Times,  in  the  Succ    pp.  66,  133,  142.     Palmer  on 

Melli.  Quart.  Rev   (Jan.  1841,  p.  76.)  the  Ch.  vol.  i.  pp.  68,  70,  576. 
"  The  doctrine  of  a  divinely  consti- 


LECT.   XIX.]       PRELACY  BY  ITS  OWN  SHOWING,  SCHISMATICAL,  475 

ation  from  some  church  already  established,  or  which  is  the  most 
ancient  in  any  given  place,  irrespective  of  the  causes  of  such 
separation,  then,  instead  of  being  any  brand  of  heresy  or  error, 
it  will  be  found  to  apply  equally  to  the  most  opposite  commu- 
nions. Thus,  while  presbytery  will,  on  this  ground,  be  schism  in 
England,  prelacy  will  be  schism  in  Scotland,  and  both  schism  in 
France.  Thus  also  in  the  New-England  States  certainly,  and 
in  other  portions  of  this  country  probably,  prelacy  is  schismatical, 
and  presbytery  alone  catholic,'  since  presbytery  was  in  these 
places  first  established.''     Indeed,  on  a  strict  application  of  this 


1)  See  Vind.  of  Presb.  Ord.  by 
Rev.  Noah  Welles,  p.  21. 

2)  It  has  been  stated,  that  for 
seventy  years  there  was  not  a  single 
episcopal  church  in  New  England. 
And  yet,  although  the  established  re- 
ligion in  New  England  had  always 
been  puritan  and  not  prelatical,  yet 
were  tiie  most  strenuous  eiforts  made 
by  the  Church  of  England  through  its 
spciety,  to  introduce  prelacy  into  that 
country. 

"  It  is  well  known,"  as  Archdeacon 
Blackburne  informs  us,  (Cut.  Com.  p. 
42,)  "  that  the  societj^'s  missionarle.s 
in  New  England  have  always  been 
more,  in  a  double  proportion  at  least, 
than  in  the  other  provinces  in  Ameri- 
ca. In  the  year  17G1,  about  thirty 
missionaries  were  stationed  in  New 
England,  while  in  New  York,  New 
Jersey,  Pennsylvania,  North  Carolina, 
South  Carolina,  Georgia,  the  Bahama 
Islands,  and  Barbadoes,  there  were  no 
more  than  forty-nine,  according  to  the 
society's  abstracts."  Blayhevv's  Ob- 
servations, p.  4-5,  Lond.  ed. 

That  the  Society  for  the  Propaga- 
tion of  Religion,  which  was  instituted 
for  the  purpose  of  sending  and  sup- 
porting the  gospel  where  it  was  not 
already  established  or  enjoyed,  turned 
aside  from  its  first  and  great  duty,  — 
that  its  friends  first  maligned  and  mis- 
represented the  New-England  colo- 
nists,—  then  expended  great  efforts 
and  money  in  proselyting  to  episcopa- 
cy those  who  were  already  connected 
with  presbyterian  or  independent 
churches  ;  and  that  it  comparatively 
neglected  the  more  destitute  portions 
of  the  country,  may  be  seen  fully  es- 
tablished by  Dr.  Chas.  Chauncy  in  his 
Letter  to  the  Bishop  of  Landaff,  (Bos- 
ton, 1767,  see  pp.  17-20,  31,  33,  3.5- 
37,  51.)  He  declares  that  then,  when 
all     this     eflFort    was     being    made, 


"  throughout  an  extent  of  territory 
more  than  five  hundred  miles  in 
length,  comprehending  seven  provin- 
ces, the  four  New-England  ones,  «tc. 
containing  more  than  a  million  of 
souls,  there  are  not,  by  the  best  in- 
formation I  can  get,  more  than  eight 
or  nine  episcopal  churches,  that  sup- 
port themselves.  All  the  rest,  to  the 
amount  of  about  sixty,  more  or  less, 
chiefly  made  up  of  converts  from  oth- 
er denominations."  Indeed,  this 
proselytism,  and  the  introduction  of 
the  episcopate  is  avowed  by  the  Eish- 
of  LandafF,  to  be  the  business  of  this 
society."     See  p.  51. 

See  also  Dr.  Livirio-ston's  Letter  to 
the  Bishop  of  Landaff,  N.  York,  1768, 
pp.  14,15. 

"  The  immense  sums  expended  by 
the  venerable  society,  are  not  laid  out 
in  missions  amongst  the  native  pa- 
gans. They  are  squandered  on  mis- 
sions to  places  where  the  gospel  was 
preached,  and  admitting  tlie  articles 
of  the  Church  of  England  as  the 
stanilard  of  orthodoxy,  more  faithful- 
ly preached  before.  This,  my  lord, 
however  people  at  home  may  be  men- 
dicated  or  sermonized  out  of  their 
money,  is  so  notorious  here,  that  an 
attempt  to  adduce  proofs  to  evince  it, 
would  be  like  holding  a  candle  to 
the  sun." 

Dr.  Chandler,  in  his  Life  of  Dr. 
Samuel  Johnson,  of  King's  College, 
(New  York,  1805.)  p.  26,  allows  that 
in  1722  "  the  Church  of  England  had 
scarcely  any  existence  in  Connecti- 
cut. There  were  about  thirty  fami- 
lies at  Stratford,  chiefly  from  Eng- 
land," and  "  all  of  them  poor,  ami 
about  forty  more  in  the  neighboring 
towns,"  (p.  39.)  "  He  was  then  (1723) 
the  only  episcopal  clergyman  in  the 
colony."  (Ibid.)  See  also  pp.  36,  111, 
113. 


476  PRELACY    IN    THIS    COUNTRY    SCHISMATICAL.        [LECT.  XIX. 

rule  or  standard  of  schism,  it  may  be  argued,  that  as  the  protes- 
tant  episcopal  church  in  this  country,  is  one  of  the  most  recent 
of  all  established  ecclesiastical  organizations,  it  is  necessarily 
schismatical  in  every  portion  of  the  country,  and  ought  by  its 
own  rule,  to  conform  to  the  earlier,  and  by  this  mode  of  judg- 
ment, the  more  catholic  communions. 

The  prelacy,  therefore,  by  its  own  showing,  is  in  this  country 
schismatical.  This  it  unquestionably  is  in  Scotland,  and  wher- 
ever else  it  has  established  its  churches  in  the  bosom  of  other  de- 
nominations. And  upon  their  principles,  it  is  altogether  impossi- 
ble for  prelatic  churches  to  justify  their  continued  separation  from 
Rome.  Mr.  Palmer  delivers  the  following  as  hi^  conclusion  from 
an  examination  into  this  very  subject :'  "  It  is  impossible  that  in  tlie 
same  place  there  can  be  several  different  churches,  authorized 
by  God  and  united  to  Christ.  In  the  case  of  rival  communions 
in  a  particular  locality,  it  is  possible  that  no7ie  of  them  may  be 
christian  ;  but  one  alone  can  be  the  church  of  Christ;  and  it  is 
as  impossible  that  there  should  be  two  particular  churches  in  the 
same  place,  as  two  universal  churches  in  the  world." 

Again  :  "  But  what  I  contend  for  is,  that  in  one  locality  there 
can  be  but  one  society,  whose  communion  christians  are  bound 
to  seek  in  preference  to  all  others." 

We  are  sustained  in  this  conclusion  by  the  argument  presented 
in  "  A  Dictionary  of  the  church,"  by  the  Reverend  William 
Staunton,^  in  reply  to  the  charge  of  the  Romish  church.  He 
there  alleges  that  the  mission  of  Austin  the  monk,  and  his  coad- 
jutors to  England,  "  and  their  interference  with  the  existing 
ecclesiastical  jurisdiction,"  was  "  on  their  part  an  act  of  schism  — 
a  trespass  on  the  order,  discipline  and  prerogatives  of  a  church, 
to  meddle  with  which  they  had  no  shadow  of  right,  under  the 
circumstances  of  the  case."  This  he  shows  by  supposing  the 
case  of  a  mission  into  the  diocese  of  Rome,  and  concludes  that 
"  the  introduction  of  Romanism  into  England  was  manifestly^  a 
schismatical  intrusion." 

Mr.  Thorndike,  the  oracle  of  the   high-church,  believed  that 

At  this  period,  the  members  of  the  and  Iiis  Second  Address  ibid,  1751,  in 

episcopal    church    in    tlie    northern  ibid,  vol.  419. 

states  hardly  constituted  one  thirtieth  That  the    Church  of  England   was 

part  of  the  population.     See  Hodges  treated  as  schismatical,  and  as  a  dis- 

Hist.  Presb.   Ch.  pt.  ii.   p.   456.     See  senting  body    in  New   England,  see 

also  pp.  462,404,  473,  and  Dr.  Hum-  Chandler's  Life  of  Dr.  Samuel  John- 

phrey's  Hisl.  of  the   Soc.  &c.  p.  217.  son,  p.  39. 

See  A  Serious  Address  to  the    Mem-  1)  On  the  Ch.  vol.  i.  p.  68. 

bers  of  the    Episcopal  Separation   in  2)  New  York,  1839,  pp.  419,  420. 

New  England,  by  Noah  Hol.art,  A  M.  3)  P.  420. 
Boston,  1748.  Sprague  Coll.  vol.412, 


LECT.  XIX.]       PRELACY    IN    THIS    COUNTRY    SCHISMATICAL.  477 

they  were   guilty  of  schism  who  separated   from   the  church  of 
Rome.' 

Johnson,  in  his  Unbloody  Sacrifice,  thus  speaks  :^  "  When  two 
several  pastors  assume  to  themselves  the  privilege  of  offering 
and  consecrating  the  sacrament,  not  only  in  two  distinct  places, 
but  in  contradiction  to  each  other,  and  by  two  several  inconsistent 
claims,  then  it  is  evident  that  one  of  them  acts  by  no  commission  ; 
for  if  the  true  eucharist  can  be  had  in  two  opposite  assemblies, 
then  Christ's  flesh  ceases  to  be  one." 

Now  what  must  be  the  unavoidable  application  of  this  rule  of 
judgment,  by  every  rational  man.  To  take  an  illustration. 
There  are  in  the  city  of  Charleston,  as  is  evident  to  all,  several 
separate  and  independent  communions.  But,  as  we  are  here 
taught,  there  can  be  possibly  but  one  true  church  among  them 
all ;  and  which  is  that  one,  is  a  question  to  be  determined,  first  by 
the  uninterrupted  possession  of  the  apostolic  succession  ;  and 
secondly,  by  the  fact  of  priority  of  establishment.  Now  the 
Anglican,  and  therefore  the  Americo-Anglican  church,  ac- 
knowledges the  succession  of  the  Romish  church  to  be  apostolic 
and  valid.  Neither  can  they,  while  granting  this  position,  deny 
her  antiquity.  The  Romish  church,  then,  presents  herself  before 
us  with  greater  antiquity,  with  exclusive  claims,  and  with  an 
acknowledged  succession.^  And  since  there  can  be  but  one  true 
church  in  the  same  place;  who,  we  ask,  can  hesitate  —  if  con- 
strained to  decide  upon  these  principles  —  to  give  his  verdict 
in  favor  of  the  Romish  and  against  the  prelatic  church  ?  When, 
too,  we  bear  in  mind  that  the  Romish  and  the  Nicene  churches 
differ  chiefly,  as  it  is  alleged,  in  reference  to  ecclesiastical 
usages  or  political  arrangements ;  and  that  the  prelacy  identifies 
itself,  in  all  essential  principles,  with  the  Nicene  church;  —  by 
what  possible  reasoning  can  prelatists  avoid  the  condemnation 
of  their  own  schismatic  separation  ?  "  It  will  be  impossible,"  says 
the  author  of  Ancient  Christianity,"  "or  it  ought  to  be  so,  for  the 
professors  of  church  principles  to  make  good  much  lono-er,  their 
own  position  as  ministers  of  a  schismatic  church.  —  Denouncing 
the  reformers,  and  admitting  the  Romish  church  to  be  only 
erring  in  some  of  its  practices,  these  parties  condenm  them- 
selves on  both  hands: — they  are  sawing  the  branch  on  which 
they  sit." 

There  is  no  escaping   this  condemnatory  sentence  against  the 

1)  Weights    and     Measures    in      solves,  we    altogether  deny  the  possi- 
Rightsofthe  Chr.  Ch.p.  320.  bility    of   establishing  the   fact  of  an 

2)  Oxf.  Tr.  vol.  iii.  p.  157.  uninterrupted  prelatic  succession. 

3)  We  mean,  of  course,   as  ac-  4)  Vol.  i.  p.  545. 
knowledged  by  the  pielacy.    For  our- 


478  PRELATIC    EXCLUSIVENESS    SCHISMATICAL.         [lECT.  XIX. 

prelacy.  Is  this  doctrine  of  apostolical  succession  true,  and  the 
consef|uent  theory  of  schism  binding  ?  then  are  prelatic  churches 
infaUibly  schismatic.  Is  this  doctrine,  on  the  other  hand,  and 
as  we  believe,  untrue  and  unfounded,  and  all  its  unchristian  and 
absurd  inferences  equally  vain  and  sinful?  — then  is  the  prelacy 
still  schismatic  in  its  treatment  of  other  christian  communions,  that 
is,  nineteen  twentieths  of  all  the  reformed  churches  throughout  the 
world.  By  excotnmunicating  these  cliurches,  prelatists  excom- 
municate themselves,*  and  expose  themselves  to  the  enviable 
notoriety  of  proclaiming  that  they  alone — a  mere   moiety  of 

CHRISTENDOM CONSTITUTE  THE  ONLY,  TRUE,  CATHOLIC,  AND 

UNIVERSAL  CHURCH  OF  Jesus  Christ.  Far  different  was  the 
sentiment  of  the  reformers.  "  We  do  not,"  say  they,  in  the 
language  of  the  Helvetic  Confession,  "  by  a  wicked  schism  separ- 
ate and  break  fellowship  with  the  holy  churches  of  Christ  in  Ger- 
many, France,  England,  or  other  nations  of  the  christian  world." 
Far  different  were  the  sentiments,  also,  of  the  English  reformers, 
as  has  been  already  seen  ;  and  of  her  best  and  greatest  divines. 
"  But  because  I  esteem  them  churches  not  completely  formed, 
do  I,  therefore,"  says  Archbishop  Bramhall,^  "exclude  them 
from  all  hopes  and  salvation  ?  or  esteem  them  aliens  and  stran- 
gers from  the  commonwealth  of  Israel  ?  or  account  them  formal 
schismatics  ?  no  such  thing." 

But  this  doctrine,  as  is  avowed,  does  thus  unchurch  nearly 
all  the  reformed  communions  ;  destroys  their  ministry  ;  renders 
their  ordinances  inefficacious  and  worthless  ;  and  severs  them, 
"  as  withered  branches,'^  from  the  church  of  Christ.  It  debars 
their  ministers  from  the  pulpits  of  the  prelacy  ;  it  excludes  even 
their  dead  bodies  from  burial  within  its  sacred  territory  ;  and  it 
withholds  from  them  every  token  of  christian  recognition  and 
ecclesiastical  brotherhood.^ 

Thus  does  this  schismatical  theory  burst  asunder  the  bands  of 
our  common  Christianity,  and  perpetuate,  and  make  necessary, 

BY  connecting  THEM  W[TH  THE  OBLIGATION  OF  A  SACRED 
PRINCIPLE,  THE  DISCORDS,  DIVISIONS,  AND  ALIENATIONS,  OF 
THE    CHRISTIAN    FAMILY. 

Nor  has  its  influence  been  less  baneful  within  the  bosom  of 
the  prelacy  itself.  Schismatical  towards  all  others,  and  involv- 
ing themselves  in  certain  criminality,  this  system  has  originated 
and  perpetuated  schisms  and  parties  within  their  own  commun- 

1)  "  St.   Cyprian,  Firmilian,  and  excommunicated  himself  from  them." 
the  Africans,  did  the  like,"  says  Dr.  2)  Vind.  of  Ch.  of  Engl.  Oxf  Tr. 

Clao-gett,   (Notes  of  the   Ch.  p.  177,)  vol.  iii.  p.  138. 

"  in  opposition  to  Pope  Stephen ;  3)  To  refuse  communion  with 
Firmilian  plainly  telling  them,  that  other  churches  is  schism.  See  Palm- 
while  he  thought  to  excommunicate  eron  the  Ch.  vol.  i.  pp.  17,  21,  52,60. 
all  them    from   himself,  he   had  but  Bib.  Repertory,  1832,  p.  34. 


LECT.  XIX.]       THE  PRELATIC  SECTS  DEVELOPE  THIS  TENDENCY.  479 


ion.  Hostile  confederacies  are  formed  within  this  very  church. 
"  In  the  bitterness  of  their  spirit  they  glory  in  their  unholy  en- 
deavors to  arm  brother  against  brother,  in  the  hope  of  waging 
worse  than  a  civil  war  with  the  deadly  weapons  of  theological 
hatred."^  The  Anglican  church  is  a  house  divided  against  it- 
self.^ It  is  aptly  represented,  in  its  motley  elements,  by  the 
English  language,  made  up,  as  it  is,  of  the  most  discordant  ma- 
terials, gathered  from  every  foreign  dialect.  Avowing,  as  the 
great  end  and  aim  of  this  doctrine,  the  preservation  of  unity,  it 
prevents  its  growth.  It  also  violates  it,  when  formed  ;  and  thus 
is  schism  made  the  cure  of  schism.  While,  therefore,  "  the 
Church  of  England  condemns  schism  in  every  way,  its  authors, 
its  maintainers,  and  its  conventicles,"  so  that,  as  Mr.  Palmer 
boasts,  "  the  subverters  of  its  laws,  rules,  and  orders,  are  all  sub- 
jected to  excommunication,  and  regarded  as  wicked,"*  she 
must  add  another  anathema  against  that  "  schism  within  the 
church,'''*  which  is  equally  contrary  to  the  will  of  Christ,  and  of 
which,  as  the  result  of  this  very  doctrine,  she  is  notoriously 
guilty.' 


1)  Hook's  Call  to  Union,  p.  17. 

2)  See  tlie  evidences  given  in 
Lect.  xvii. 

3)  On  the  Ch.  vol.  i.  p.  219. 

4)  Ibid,  p.  416. 

5)  On  the  existence  of  such  par- 
ties in  the  Church,  besides  what  has 
been  said  in  Lect.  seventeenth,  see 
British  Critic,  Ap.  1839,  pp.  3%,  418, 
Oxf.  Tracts,  vol.  i.  pp.  242,  and  New- 
man's Lect.  on  Rom.  pp.  10,  23,  40, 
403,  404;  Palmer  on  the  Ch.  vol.,i. 
pp.  247,  2.52,  267,  369,  506;  Lond. 
Chr.  Obs.  Id3;t,  pref.  p.  4,  and  592; 
Hook's  Call  to  Union,  p.  44,  note,  81, 
106  ;  Dr.  Pusey's  Letter,  p.  79  ;  Oxf. 
Tr.  vol.  iv.  (Enj.  ed  )  pp.  31 ,  27,  81  ; 
Bethel  on  Bapt.  Regeneration,  p.  20  ; 
Bib.  Repert.  for  1833,  pp.  336-338. 
See  on  the  altitudinarian  and  latitu- 
dinarian  parties  in  the  Eng.  Church, 
and  how  they  pursued  each  with  an 
unrelenting  rage,  which  not  only 
lasted  through  life,  but  was  unap- 
peased  even  by  death,  the  Lond. 
Chr.  Obs.  1839,  pp.  80,  81,  &c.  Three 
divisions  acknowledged  in  ibid,  p.  83. 
As  acknowledged  bv  Mr.  Lushington, 
see  Eclectic  Rev.  Oct.  1838,  p.  409. 
Edinb.  Rev.  April,  1839,  p.  142,  &c. 
The  partes  into  which  the  English 
Ch.  is  divided,  are  enumerated  under 
three  classes,  in  the  Lond.  Chr.  Obs. 
Feb.  1841,  pp.  76,  77.  Four  clauses 
of  interpretations  of  the  39lh  Art.  and 


of  subscription  to  them,  are  ffiven  by 
Overton,  p.  18,  &c.  Lond.  Chr.  Obs. 
1802,  p.  27. 

The  schismatical  tendency  and 
practical  influence  of  this  doctrine  is 
argued  by  Baxter,  in  his  True  and 
Only  Way  of  Concord,  Lond.  1680, 
pt.  iii.  ch.  ix.  against  Dodwell.  See 
also  Baxter's  Treatise  of  Episcopacy, 
Lond.  1681,  pt.  ii.  ch.  viii. 

*"  This  document,  however,"  says 
the  Edinburgh  Witness,  Sept.  19, 
1840,"  contafnsan  insinuation  against 
the  church  of  Scotland,  which  its 
prudent  authors  did  not  choose  to 
convert  into  an  assertion.  The  insin- 
uation is,  that  presbyterianism  does 
not  promote  '  unity  and  order  in  re- 
ligion.' From  the  mouth  of  papists, 
this  would  have  come  with  a  better 
grace,  for  it  is  their  old  argument 
against  all  protestant  churches.  \n 
the  mouth  of  a  renegade  presbyterian, 
a  love  of  '  order  and  unity  '  some- 
times means  a  love  of  despotism, 
sometimes  nothing  more  than  a  just 
terror  of  ecclesiastical  discipline. 
<  Order  and  unity  '  forsooth  !  Who 
broke  in  upon  the  order  and  unity  of 
the  church  of  Scotland,  but  the  very 
ancestors  of  the  men  who  now  com- 
plain ;  the  old  Jacobites  of  Scotland,  at 
whose  instigation  Queen  Anne's  per- 
fidious act  was  hurried  through,  and 
by   whom,   to    a    great    extent,  it  is 


480 


PRELATIC    SCHISM    MADE    MANIFEST. 


[lECT.  XIX. 


This  system  is,  then,  schismatical.  It  requires  the  belief  of 
tenets  and  practices,  which  we  must  regard  to  be  erroneous  and 
unscriptural,  and  this  is  schism.  It  makes  terms  of  com- 
munion with  Christ's  church,  which  he  never  enjoined  ;  and  this 
is  schism.  It  anathematizes  and  excludes  from  covenanted  mercy 
all  who  cannot  conscientiously  embrace  it,  —  and  this  is  schism. 
It  overthrows  the  unity  of  the  church  in  its  faith,  in  its  charity, 
in  its  spiritual  cognation  and  alliance,  in  its  mystical  incorpora- 
tion as  one  body  ;  in  its  peaceable  concord  and  confederacy  ; 
in  the  concurrent  harmony  and  cooperation  of  its  ministers,  — 
and  this  is  schism.  Tried  by  the  standard  of  those  definitions 
which  have  been  given  of  it  by  prelatical  divines,  it  is  found  to 
be  schism.  And,  measured  by  their  reasonings  upon  the  sub- 
ject, it  is  declared  to  be  schismatic.  Described  by  the  testimo- 
ny of  their  own  writers,  it  is  schismatical.'     Estimated  by  its 


still  defended?  That  act  alone  in- 
troduced all  tlie  disorder  and  disunion 
into  the  presbyterian  family  of  Scot- 
land. Aboli^h  it,  and  perfect  peace 
will  soon  be  restored.  Meantime,  we 
utterly  deny  that '  these  objects  have 
ever  been  amply  secured'  in  the 
Ciiurch  of  England.  Much  as  we 
respect  many  of  the  excellent  men  in 
that  church,  it  is  impossible  not  to  see, 
that  so  far  from  unity, '  it  contains  Ar- 
minians  and  Socinians,  Pelagians  and 
Puseyites,  amongst  the  clergy  :  and 
that  whilst  the  church  of  Scotland 
has  deposed  a  Campbell,  an  Irving, 
and  many  more,  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land either  has  not  the  power  or  the 
will  to  restore  '  order  '  amongst  her 
refractory  children.  Popery  is  riot- 
inof  untouched  in  the  halls  of  Oxford. 
Let  us  lay  aside  our  bigotry,  and  learn 
to  speak  with  candor  ;  let  us  rather 
imitate  what  is  good  in  our  neighbor 
churches,  than  deal  in  notoriously 
silly  and  unfounded  assertions,  with 
the  efltict  of  misleading  the  igno- 
rant." 

"  And  who  does  not  know,"  says 
Dr.  Mitchell,  (Letters  to  Bishop  Skin- 
ner, Lond.  1809,  p.  21.)  "  that  when 
christians  were  a  small  body  in  com- 
parison of  the  infidels  around  them 
every  where  ;  when  they  were  all 
alike  exposed  to  persecution  for  their 
common  faith,  and  when  the  apostles 
were  set  over  them,  with  at  leastepis- 
copal  authority,  there  were  schisms 
and  heresies,  tJiat  is,  divisions  and 
sects  among  them  ?  Episcopacy  the 
•ruard  of  unity  !  Did  not  that  form  of 
ecclesiastical  polity  prevail  universal- 


ly, before  the  first  of  the  oecumenical 
councils  was  convened  .''  What  made 
it  necessary  to  convene  those  great 
assemblies,  which,  by  the  way,  gen- 
erally aggravated  the  disorders  which 
they  were  called  to  cure  .-'  Was  it 
not  heresies  and  schisms,  which  epis- 
copacy could  neither  prevent  nor 
suppress  ?  Nay,  ii^  it  not  well  known, 
that  contests  amongambitious  church- 
men about  dignified  stations  in  the 
hierarchy,  gave  rise  to  heresies  and 
schisms,  and  sometimes  to  massacres, 
and  to  whatever  was  most  suited  to 
bring  disgrace  on  the  clerical  charac- 
ter and  the  christian  name  .-'" 

1)  This  doctrine  is  schismatical  be- 
cause it  is  thus  plainly  opposed  to  the 
true  unity  of  tiie  catholic  church.  It 
makes  others  beside  those  points, which 
even  Bingham,  with  all  his  hierarchi- 
cal prejudices,  shows  to  have  been  an- 
ciently regarded  as  alone  necessary 
to  the  well-being  of  the  church, — 
fundamental  and  essential  to  its  very 
being.  (See  Bingham's  Antiq.  b  xvi. 
ch.  i.)  It  is  thus  schismatic,  because 
it  makes  essential  to  a  true  church, 
and  to  true  membership  in  that 
church,  the  belief  of  dogmas  which 
are  not  contained  in  those  creeds,  in 
which,  as  the  same  author  testifies, 
the  church  had  always  collected  or 
summed  up  those  fundamental  arti- 
cles, the  profession  of  which  was  ever 
esteemed  both  necessary  on  the  one 
hand,  and  sufficient  on  the  other,  to 
admit  and  to  keep  men  in  the  unity 
of  the  church.  (See  authorities  in  ibid, 
vol.  vi.  p.  4,  &c.) 

This  doctrine  is  schismatical,  be- 


LECT.  XIX.]      PRELATICAL   EXCLUSIVENESS    SCHISMATICAL, 


481 


fruits,  it  is  found  leading  to  the  most  bitter  schisms.  By  the 
word  of  God,  by  reason,  by  common  sense,  by  the  universal 
judgment  of  all  impartial  persons,  this  doctrine  of  prelatical  suc- 


cause  further  it  is  opposed  to,  and  is 
destructive  of  that  love  and  charity, 
in  which  one  great  branch  of  true 
Christianity  consists,  (Bingham,  b. 
xvi.  ch.  i.  §  ii.)  It  is  schismalical,  also, 
because  it  requires  agreement  in  the 
same  rites  and  ceremonies  which  were 
anciently  regarded  as  matters  of  an 
indifferent  nature,  (ibid,  §  15.)  It  is 
no  less  schismatical,  in  that  it  ef- 
fectually prevents  the  maintenance  of 
communion  between  different  church- 
es, who,  nevertheless,  hold  the  same 
faith,  and  profess  obedience  to  all 
the  laws  of  Christ.  Il  is  schismatical 
because,  while  the  ancients  regarded 
even  excommunicate  persons,  of  oth- 
er sects,  to  be  "  in  some  measure  in 
and  of  the  church;" — (ibid,  §  xvii. 
vol.  vi.  p.  58,) — this  doctrine  pro- 
nounces those  who  hold  to  the  same 
creeds,  to  be  entirely  without  the 
church,  and  separated  from  it.  Thus 
Optatus  tells  the  Donatists,  (apud 
Bingham,  b.  xvi.  ch.  i.  §  xvii.  vol.  vi. 
p.  58,)  "  that  they  were  divided  from 
the  church  in  part,  not  in  every  res- 
pect ;  for  that  was  tlie  nature  of  a 
schism,  to  be  divided  in  part,  not  to- 
tally cut  asunder.  And  that  for  very 
good  reason,  because  both  we  and 
you  have  the  same  ecclesiastical  con- 
versation; though  the  minds  of  men 
be  at  variance,  tlie  sacraments  do  not 
vary.  We  have  all  the  same  faith, 
we  are  all  signed  with  the  same  seal ; 
we  are  no  otherwise  baptized  than  you 
are,  nor  otherwise  ordained  than  you 
are.  We  all  read  the  same  divine 
testament,  we  all  pray  to  the  same 
God.  The  Lord's  prayer  is  the  same 
with  us,  as  it  is  with  you ;  but  there 
being  a  rent  made,  as  was  said  before, 
by  the  parts  hanging  this  way  and 
that  way,  an  union  was  necessary  to 
restore  the  whole  to  its  integrity." 
He  repeats  this  again,  in  other  pla- 
ces. 

"  St.  Austin  always  discourses," 
says  Bingham,  "  after  the  same  man- 
ner, concerning  this  union,  in  part 
(apud  Bingham,  b.  xvi.  §  xvii.  vol.  vi. 
pp.  59,  60 ;)  in  many  things,  ye  are 
one  with  us,  in  baptism,  in  the  creed, 
and  the  rest  of  God's  sacraments." 
And  hence  he  also  concludes,  "  that 
whether  they  would  or  no,  they  were 

61 


their  brethren,  and  could  not  cease  to 
be  so,  so  long  as  tliey  continued  to 
say,  our  Fatlier,  and  did  not  renounce 
their  creed  and  their  baptism.  For 
there  was  no  medium  between  chris- 
tians and  pagans.  If  they  retained 
faith,  and  baptism,  and  the  common 
prayer  of  the  Lord,  which  teaches  all 
men  to  style  God  their  Father ;  so  far 
they  were  christians ;  and  as  far  as 
they  were  christians,  so  far  they  were 
brethren,  though  turbulent  and  con- 
tentious, who  would  neither  keep  the 
unity  of  the  spirit  in  the  bond  of 
peace,  nor  continue  to  be  united  in 
the  catholic  church  with  the  rest  of 
their  brethren." 

Equally  evident  is  this  conclusion, 
from  the  inferences  of  Dr.  Barrow. 
From  his  discourse  concerning  the 
Unity  of  the  Church,  Dr.  Barrow  de- 
duces the  following  among  other 
corollaries.  ( Wks.  fol.  vol.  i.  p.  781. ) 

"  3.  All  churches,  which  have  a  fair 
settlement  in  several  countries,  are 
co-ordinate,  neither  can  one  challenge 
a  jurisdiction  over  the  other." 

"  4.  The  nature  of  schism  is  hence 
declared  ;  viz.  that  it  consistetla  in 
disturbing  the  order  and  peace  of  any 
single  church  ;  in  withdrawing  from 
it  obedience  and  compliance  with  it; 
in  obstructing  good  correspondence, 
charity,  peace,  between  several 
churches  ;  in  condemning  or  censur- 
ing other  churches  without  just  cause, 
or  beyond  due  measure." 

"  In  refusing  to  maintain  commun- 
ion with  other  churches  without  rea- 
sonable cause  ;  whence  Firmilian  did 
challenge  T.  Stephanus  with  schism." 

Adjudged  by  tliese  conclusions, 
how  can  our  prelatic  brethren  escape 
from  the  charge  of  schism  ?  For,  as 
Dr.  Barrow  says  in  the  same  treatise, 
(Wks.  vol.  i.  pp.  7G6,  783,)  "All 
cliristians  should  be  ready,  when  op- 
portunity doth  invite,  to  admit  one 
another  to  conjunction  in  offices  of 
piety  and  charity;  in  prayer,  in 
communion  of  the  eucharist,  in 
brotherly  conversation,  and  pious 
conference  for  edification  or  advice. 
So  that  he  who  flies  and  avoids  com- 
munion with  us,  you  in  your  prudence 
may  know,  that  such  a  man  breaks 
himself  off  from  the  ichole  church .    St . 


482 


THIS   PRELATICAL   THEORY    SCHISMATICAL.  [lECT.    XIX. 


cession  is  pronounced  to  be  schismatical,  as  it  equally  violates 
the  union  of  the  church  with  its  head,  and  the  union  of  its  true 
members  with  each  other. 


Chrysostom  dolh  complain  of  Epiph- 
anius  :  T/(en  when  he  came  to  the  great 
and  holy  city  Constantinople,  he  came 
not  out  into  the  congregation,  accord- 
ing to  custom  and  the  ancient  manner, 
he  joined  not  himself  with  us,  nor  com- 
municaUd  tcilh  vs  in  the  word  and 
prayer,  and  the  holy  communion,^'  &c. 
"  And  also,  il'  they  do  reject  com- 
munion and  peace  upon  reasonable 
terms  j  if  they  vent  unjust  and  un- 


charitable censures ;  if  they  are  tur- 
bulent and  violent,  striving  by  all 
means  to  subdue  and  enslave  other 
churches  to  their  will,  or  their  dic- 
tates,—  if  they  damn  and  persecute 
all  who  refuse  to  be  their  subjects; 
in  such  cases  we  may  reject  such 
churches  as  heretical,  or  schismatical, 
or  wickedly  unciiaritable  and  unjust 
in  their  proceedings." 


LECTURE   XX. 


THE    TRUE    DOCTRINE    OF    APOSTOLICAL    SUCCESSION     ASSERTED, 

The  untenableness  of  the  prelatic  doctrine  of  apostolical  suc- 
cession having  been  fully  established,  we  might  here  terminate 
our  labors.  Indeed,  it  was  our  original  design  to  close  our  dis- 
cussion of  this  doctrine  at  this  point,  and  to  reserve  the  positive 
statement  of  what  we  regard  as  the  true  doctrine  on  this  subject, 
as  an  introduction  to  our  subsequent  presentation  of  the  claims 
of  presbytery.  As,  however,  there  will  be  some  necessary  delay 
in  the  publication  of  this  proposed  course,  we  have  thought  it 
would  be  more  useful  and  more  satisfactory,  to  present  it  in  the 
present  volume  —  that  while  we  show  cause  for  the  rejection  of 
the  prelatic  hypothesis,  we  may  not  leave  any  mind  bewildered 
with  doubt,  but  may  rather  establish  it  in  the  true  principles, 
which  lie  at  the  foundation  of  this  important  subject. 

In  doing  so,  we  must  at  once  commit  ourselves,  and  our 
readers,  to  the  alone  guidance  and  control  of  the  infallible  rule 
of  our  faith  and  practice. 

To  the  word  of  God,  we  render  implicit  faith  and  entire 
homage.  This  is  the  standard  of  our  belief — this  the  fountain 
of  our  joys  —  this  the  charter  of  our  rights.  As  christians,  and 
in  a  double  sense  as  presbyterians,  we  are  pledged  to  the  Bible, 
and  nothing  but  the  Bible.  To  the  fathers,  doctors  and  divines, 
learned  in  the  lore  of  ecclesiastical  antiquity,  we  allow  the  privi- 
lege conferred  by  prelatists  upon  presbyters  and  also  u|)on  the 
laity,  in  reference  to  their  decisions, —  that  is,  the  privilege  of 
consenting  to  the  Bible,  but  not  of  differing  from  it ; —  the  priv- 
ilege of  concurring  with  it,  but  no  right,  power,  or  authority, 
either  of  adding  to,  or  subtracting  from  it. 

Let  us  again  remind  you,  that  the  system,  which,  as  it  regards 
any  reasonable  claim  to  our  reception,  we  have  now  rejected,  is 


484  "WE    OPPOSE   PRELACY,    NOT   EPISCOPACY.  [LECT.   XX. 

not  episcopacy,  but  prelacy — not  low-church,  or  evangelical 
episcopacy,  but  high-church  and  unscriptural  prelacy.  That 
three  grades  of  ministers  may  be  ordered  and  arranged  by  those, 
who  in  this  way,  think  they  can  best  govern  and  advance  the 
church  of  Christ,  with  different  offices  allotted  to  each  separate 
class  —  this  we  have  not  denied;  this  exercise  of  the  right  of 
private  judgment  we  have  not  assailed.  That  such  an  arrange- 
ment, de  jure  ecclesiastico  vel  humano,  is  warrantable,  where  it 
is  entered  upon  with  a  sincere  desire  to  glorify  God,  and  in  a 
sincere  belief  that  it  is  enjoined  by  Him,  we  have  not,  in  any 
way,  questioned.  Nor  would  we  intentionally  wound  the  feel- 
ings of  those  who,  in  the  unity  of  the  spirit,  and  in  the  bonds  of 
charity,  hold  firmly  to  this  arrangement.  That  they  are  mis- 
taken, we  assuredly  believe,  and  will  hope  yet  to  prove  ;  but 
that  they  are  so  far  mistaken,  as  either  not  to  be  good  christians 
or  true  churches,  we  are  far  from  believing. 

On  the  other  hand,  that  these  orders  are,  de  jure  divino,  so 
as  to  be  the  essential,  and  only  valid  constituents  of  a  true  and 
pure  church  of  Christ; — that  they  perpetuate,  in  a  personal 
hereditary  succession,  the  gifts  of  God's  Holy  Spirit,  and  the 
efficiency  of  God's  promises,  so  that  all  other  churches,  not 
within  the  line  of  such  a  succession,  are  beyond  the  pale  of 
Christ's  visible  kingdom  ;  —  this  doctrine  we  have  denied,  and  do 
again  deny  to  be  either  scriptural  or  reasonable.  This  theory 
of  prelatists  we  have  denounced,  and  do  again  denounce,  as  a 
visionary  hypothesis,  alike  unsupported  by  scripture,  history, 
fact,  reason,  or  the  judgment  of  the  best  divines  of  the  church ; 
aad  also  as  intolerant,  unchristian,  suicidal  and  absurd.  And 
this  we  are  called  upon  to  do,  as  we  would  justify  our  own  char- 
acter, and  sustain  our  own  claims,  against  such  usurping  and 
uncharitable  despotism. 

But  in  thus  spurning  away  from  us,  as  unsupportable,  what  is 
termed  the  doctrine  of  the  apostolical  succession,  or  of  the  apos- 
tolical descent,  it  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  we  utterly  reject 
the  necessary  belief  in  the  visibility,  unity,  or  perpetuity  of  the 
one,  holy,  catholic,  and  apostolic  church  of  Christ.  In  this  ven- 
erable and  most  illustrious  kingdom,  we  would  ever  rejoice.  In 
the  identity  and  unity  of  this  glorious  company  —  the  body,  of 
which  Christ  our  Lord  is  head  —  we  do  most  heartily  believe. 
It  is  the  imperishable  and  invincible  pillar,  by  which  is  pro- 
claimed, on  earth  and  in  heaven,  the  wisdom  and  glory  of  Him 
who  is  "  mighty  to  save."  "  He  instituted  its  sacraments  ;  He 
consecrated  its  ministers  ;  He  sketched  the  great  outlines  of  its 
polity  ;  He  illuminates  it  by  his  spirit ;  He  honors  it  with  his  per- 
petual presence  ;  He  is  the  source  of  its  authority,  the  origin  of 


LECT.  XX.]  WHAT   PRESBYTERIANS   BELIEVE.  485 

its  dignity,  the  model  of  its  purity,  the  subject  of  its  doctrines, 
its  representative  and  advocate  in  the  court  of  heaven," — its  all 
and  in  all.' 

That  in  this  church,  or  kingdom,  Christ  our  Lord  and  Master 
has  instituted  laws  and  ordinances,  and  appointed  officers  to 
administer  and  preserve  them — who  should  be  the  custodiers 
of  its  doctrines  ;  the  preservers  of  its  morals ;  the  heralds  of  its 
glad  tidings  ;  and  their  promulgators  to  the  end  of  time,  and  to 
the  ends  of  the  earth  ;  —  in  this,  also,  we  most  believingly 
exult.  To  these  spiritual  officers  is  committed  whatever  of 
authority  or  power  was  left  with  the  church,  when  the  high  and 
sacred  functions  of  the  apostolic  college  were  determined  at 
the  death  of  the  apostles,  and  ceased.  This  is  clearly  taught 
us  by  the  apostle,  when  he  says  —  "  the  things  that  thou  hast 
heard  of  me  among  many  witnesses,  the  same  commit  thou  also 
to  faithful  men,  who  shall  be  able  to  teach  others  also."  (2  Tim. 
ii.  2.)  Here  we  are  instructed  that  some  were  to  be  separated  as 
teachers  in  Christ's  church  ;  that  they  who  were  thus  separated 
should  be  found  qualified  as  faithful  men  ;  and  that  the  word, 
order,  and  ordinances  of  God's  house,  should  be  solemnly  com- 
mitted unto  them  ;  that  in  this  way  there  might  be  preserved  in 
the  church  a  perpetual  succession  of  appointed  teachers,  who 
might  "  fulfil  their  ministry  according  to  this  dispensation  com- 
mitted unto  them."  So  also  in  that  declaration  of  our  Saviour 
made  to  Peter :  "  Upon  this  rock  I  will  build  my  church,  and 
the  gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail  against  it,"  (Math.  xvi.  18;) 
which  it  is  not  our  design  at  this  time  fully  to  discuss  —  it  is  as 
clearly  declared  that  the  foundation  upon  which  this  church 
should  rest,  is  the  heaven-inspired  confession  of  Peter,  that 
Christ  was,  in  human  form,  the  true  Messiah,  and  in  his  pre- 
incarnate  nature,  the  everlasting  Jehovah.  It  is  also  here  fore- 
shown, that  there  shall  always  be  in  the  world  a  visible  church, 
holding  forth  to  men,  in  a  more  or  less  perfect  form,  this  heav- 
enly doctrine  of  the  ever-blessed  Emmanuel,  —  God  with  us. 

In  like  manner,  do  we  find  in  that  final  commission  given  to 
his  church,  by  our  ascending  Lord,  (Math,  xxviii.  19,  20,)  and 
which  constitutes  the  ministerial  charter,  the  palladium  of  the 
church  —  it  is  immutably  promised  by  Him  who  cannot  lie,  and 
who  is  fully  able  to  accomplish  all  his  will,  that  even  to  the  end 
of  the  world  He  will  be  spiritually  present,  in  the  way  of  direc- 
tion, encouragement,  and  support,  not  only  with  the  apostles, 
but  with  all  his  ministering  servants. ^ 

1)  See  Steele's  Phil,  of  Evid.  of     is  thus  implied  in  these  last  two  pas- 
Chr.  p.  99.  sages  in  Faber's  Albigenses,  Pref.  and 

2)  See  a  full  exhibition  of  what      b.  i.  ch.  i.  and  again  at  p.  532. 


486         SEVERAL  SENSES  OF  THE  WORB  CHURCH.    [LECT.  XX. 

It  is  all-important  to  any  thing  like  a  clear  understanding  of 
the  matter  in  hand,  that  we  should  have  right  apprehensions  of 
the  meaning  attached  to  the  terra  church  ;  for  this  word,  as  used 
in  scripture,  has  several  senses.  It  always  refers,  in  its  appro- 
priated christian  sense,  to  the  kingdom  of  God,  as  composed  of 
his  professed  subjects,  who  are  under  the  government  of  his 
spiritual  laws.  But  it  has  very  different  meanings,  according 
to  that  particular  aspect  in  which  this  spiritual  kingdom  is 
viewed.  We  may,  for  instance,  consider  this  kingdom  in  its 
universal  extent,  as  embracing  all  professing  christians,  in  what- 
ever country  they  are  found  ;  or  as  it  is  limited  to  some  one  par- 
ticular country,  or  to  some  one  particular  denomination  ;  or  we 
may  confine  our  view  to  some  branch  of  this  widely-extended 
kingdom,  as  found  in  a  single  city,  or  congregation.  And  as 
the  present  condition  of  the  church  is  but  a  preparation  for  its 
future  glorious  and  perfect  consummation  —  when  all  who  have, 
in  any  age  or  period  of  the  world,  become  true  members  of  the 
church  on  earth,  shall  be  found  enrolled  as  members  of  the 
church  triumphant  above  —  we  may  consider  the  term  as  appli- 
cable to  this  complete  and  glorious  body. 

While,  therefore,  the  church  is  one  —  one  house — one 
family  —  one  kingdom  —  one  body  —  one  vine  —  it  may  be 
separately  considered  in  any  one  of  these  different  relations  — 
just  as  this  great  republic  is  one,  though  made  up  of  many  con- 
stituent parts,  in  the  several  states,  territories,  cities  and  families, 
by  the  union  of  which  it  is  formed — or  as  the  human  family  is 
one  homogeneous  body,  embracing  all  who  are  fellow-heirs  to 
the  same  humanity,  although  infinitely  diversified  as  to  char- 
acter, government,  and  customs. 

Now,  as  it  is  at  once  manifest,  that  what  would  be  proper,  as 
spoken  of  the  republic  as  a  whole,  might  be  very  improper 
when  applied  to  it  in  any  one  of  its  subordinate  or  separate 
parts  —  so  is  it  equally  plain,  that  what  may  be  true  of  the 
church  in  one  aspect  of  it,  may  be  false  when  applied  to  it  in 
some  other  aspect.  Herein  lies  the  secret  of  much  of  that 
obscurity  and  confusion,  that  perplexity  and  doubt,  in  which  this 
whole  subject  has  been  involved,  by  the  sophistical  reasonings  of 
Romish  and  prelatical  writers.  Nor  is  tliere  any  other  thread  by 
which  we  may  be  able  to  find  our  way  out  of  their  misty  laby- 
rinth, than  a  careful  ascertainment  of  the  true  meanings  of  this 
important  term  ;  so  that  when  it  is  found  laid  down  in  the  pre- 
raise  to  any  argument,  in  one  sense,  and  then  introduced  into 
the  conclusion  in  another,  we  may  be  able  to  detect  the  wily 
stratagem,  and  discover  the  treacherous  arts  of  those  who,  by 
their  cunninir  craftiness,  lie  in  wait  to  deceive. 


LECT.  XX.]  THE    CHURCH    INVISIBLE    DESCRIBED.  487 

The  word  church  is  used,  we  apprehend,  in  scripture,  in  five 
different  meanings.'  It  refers  to  any  particular  congregation  or 
society  of  professing  christians.-  It  is  applied  to  several  congre- 
gations or  churches,  convened  as  one  body  under  the  same  gen- 
eral superintendence.^  It  means  any  assembly  of  the  rulers  of 
the  church,  when  convened  as  an  ecclesiastical  judicatory.*  It 
is  also  applied  to  the  whole  body  of  God's  redeemed  people, 
who  have  been,  or  who  shall  be,  gathered  into  one,  under  Christ, 
the  head,  and  which  is  generally  called  the  invisible  church.* 

Considered  in  this  light,  the  church  of  Christ  is  perpetual 
and  indefectible,  so  that  the  gates  of  hell  shall  never  be  able  to 
prevail  against  it.  As  invisible,  the  unity  of  the  church  is  per- 
fect, both  as  it  regards  the  unity  of  the  faith,  and  the  unity  of 
the  spirit.  As  invisible,  the  church  of  Christ  embraces  all  who 
are  true  believers ;  and  none  but  such  as  are  true  christians, 
and  very  members  incorporate  of  Christ's  mystical  body.  All 
who  are  born  again  by  the  renewing  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and 
none  but  they  who  are  thus  regenerated  by  the  spirit  of  our  God, 
are  received  as  members  into  this  church  of  the  first-born, 
whose  names  are  written  in  heaven.  Nor  is  there  any  thing 
necessary  or  essential  to  a  membership  in  this  glorious  society, 
or  to  the  inheritance  of  its  everlasting  rewards,  but  a  true  faith 
in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  Such  a  faith  unites  the  soul  to  Him, 
as  our  federal  and  our  vital  head ;  —  so  as  that  the  merit  of  his 
righteousness  is  imputed  to  us,  and  the  efiicacious  presence 
of  his  Spirit  vouchsafed,  and  his  renewing  and  sanctifying 
influences  graciously  imparted.  Neither  are  any  outward 
means,  sacraments,  and  ordinances,  otherwise  essential  to  the 
procurement  of  these  great  and  inestimable  blessings,  than  as 
they  are  made  so  by  God's  express  appointment  5  than  as  they 
are  accessible  to  the  individual  believing ;  or  at  all  otherwise, 
than  as  means  toward  the  end;  —  namely,  this  union  of  the 
soul  to  Christ.  In  this  view  of  the  church,  it  is  as  large  as 
heaven  and  earth  ;  wide  as  the  compass  of  creation  ;  boundless 
as  the  race  of  fallen  man ;  illimitable,  save  by  the  mercy  and 
the  free  promises  of  God  ;  and  enduring  as  eternity  itself. 

There  is  one  other  and  very  important  sense,  in  which  this 
word  is  employed  in  scripture.     It  means   the   whole  body  of 

1)  See  the  author's  Ecclesiastical  4)  Math,  xviii.  15, 17;  Heb.  xiii. 
Catechism  of  llie  Presbyterian  Church,  7  ;  1  Cor.  v.;  Acts  xiv.  27 — xv.  2,  30, 
chap.  i.                                                           32,  and  ch.  xi.  26. 

2)  See  Col.  iv.  p.  15,  and  Rom.  5)  See  Eph.  v. 25, 27;  Col.  i.l8; 
xvi.  5.                                                          Eph.  i.  10,  22,  23. 

3)  See  1  Cor.  i.  2,  and  xiv.  34 ; 
Acts  viii.  1.  comp.  with  xxi.  20,  and 
Acts  XV.  6,  and  xvi.  4. 


488  THE    VISIBLE    CHURCH   DESCRIBED.  [lECT.  XX. 

those  throughout  the  world,  of  every  denomination,  with  their 
children,  who  profess  the  christian  religion.  This  is  commonly 
called  the  visible  church,  because  it  includes  all  who  make  an 
outward  and  open  profession  of  Christianity,  although  many  of 
them  may  not  be  truly  christians,  being  unrenewed,  unsancti- 
fied,  and  unholy,  and,  therefore,  not  members  of  the  church  in- 
visible.' As  thus  visible,  the  church  includes  hypocrites,  while 
as  invisible  it  includes  only  true  believers.  As  visible,  it  re- 
quires from  its  members  only  an  external  and  credible  profession 
of  the  faith ;  while,  as  invisible,  it  supposes  in  every  member  of 
it  a  sincere  and  hearty  reception  of  the  truth,  in  the  love  of  it. 
As  invisible,  the  only  condition  necessary  to  the  certain  enjoy- 
ment of  all  its  blessings,  is  a  true  faith  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ ; 
as  a  visible  organized  body,  the  church  must  necessarily  be 
governed  by  the  laws  of  Christ ;  she  must  observe  whatever 
statutes  Christ  has  ordained ;  she  must  diligently  use  whatever 
means  of  grace  He  has  chosen  to  appoint.  Thus,  as  an  army, 
is  she  enlisted  under  His  banners,  as  the  captain  of  salvation. 
Thus,  as  a  family,  is  she  under  the  wise  guidance  and  discipline 
of  Him,  as  her  head.  Thus,  as  a  kingdom,  is  she  in  all  things 
subject  unto  Him,  who  is  the  King  of  Zion,  and  whose  throne  is 
for  ever  and  ever. 

Now  as  all  the  elements  of  this  visible  organization  have  been 
instituted  for  the  church,  by  Christ ;  as  it  is  his  prescribed 
means  to  a  true  membership  in  the  church  invisible  and  eternal; 
as  membership  in  this  church  is  made  necessary  to  all  to  whom 
it  is  possible  ; — it  is  of  evident  and  great  importance  to  learn 
what  these  elements  are,  and  wherein  consists  the  essential  con- 
stituents of  a  true  church.  Wilfully  to  set  at  naught  the  ordi- 
nances of  Heaven,  were  a  just  provocative  of  Heaven's  righteous 
indignation  ;  while  ignorant  neglect  of  important  means  of  grace, 
may  lead  to  the  impoverishment  of  the  soul,  and  the  loss  of  great 
spiritual  mercies. 

To  the  most  careless  observer,  there  are  evidently  great  va- 
rieties of  outward  order  and  administration,  in  the  various  bodies 
claiming  to  be  constituent  portions  of  this  visible  church  of 
Christ,  which  is  also  catholic,  or  universal.  All,  however, 
claim  for  their  peculiar  arrangements  the  sanction  of  scripture  ; 
while  some  maintain,  that  their  order  and  polity  is  so  scriptural 
and  divine  as  to  be  the  only  one  allowable.  They,  therefore, 
hold  that  conformity  to  their  order  is  absolutely  necessary  to  any 
inheritance  in  Israel ;  and  that  any  deviation  from  it  thereby  cuts 

1)  See  Acts  ii.  39,  47 ;  1  Cor.  lii.      1  Corinthians,  vii.  14,  and  x.  32  ;  Acts 
12,  13,  23 ;  1  Cor.  xv.  9 ;  Acts  viii.  3 ;      xiv.  15. 


LECT.  XX.]      WHAT  NECESSARY  TO  THE  BEING  OF  A  CHURCH.  489 

off  the  non-conforming  body  from  all  the  privileges  and  bless- 
ings of  this  heaven-appointed  church.  And  as  this  visible  church 
is  the  ordinary  and  appointed  way  to  that  which  is  invisible  and 
heavenly  ;  such  churches  are,  therefore,  as  is  believed,  cut  off 
from  any  ordinary  or  known  way  of  salvation.  Such  are  the 
views  entertained  by  its  abettors  of  the  system  of  prelacy,  as  ex- 
hibited in  the  Romish  and  the  Anglican  churches. 

It  is,  therefore,  the  object  of  our  present  inquiry,  to  discover, 
according  to  the  scriptures,  what  is,  and  what  is  not,  essential 
to  the  constitution  of  a  true  visible  church,  whether  that  church 
be  regarded  as  a  single  congregation,  or  as  a  body  embracing 
many  such  societies. 

That  there  is  such  a  catholic  and  visible  church  ;  and  that  its 
perpetuity  is  based  upon  the  immutability  of  its  foundation,  and 
the  indestructibility  of  its  own  materials,  we  require  not,  in  this 
place,  further  to  prove,  since  there  is,  on  this  point,  a  consent- 
ing harmony  among  all  the  churches  of  the  reformation.  Their 
doctrine  of  Christ,  on  this  subject,  has  nowhere  been  better 
expressed,  than  in  our  own  confession  of  faith  :  "  Unto  this 
catholic  visible  church,  Christ  hath  given  the  ministry,  oracles, 
and  ordinances  of  God,  for  the  gathering  and  perfecting  of  the 
saints,  in  this  life,  to  the  end  of  the  world  ;  and  doth  by  his 
own  presence  and  spirit,  according  to  his  promise,  make  them 
effectual  thereunto." 

"  This  catholic  church  hath  been  sometimes  more,  sometimes 
less,  visible.  And  particular  churches,  which  are  members 
thereof,  are  more  or  less  pure,  according  as  the  doctrine  of  the 
gospel  is  taught  and  embraced,  ordinances  administered,  and 
public  worship  performed  more  or  less  purely  in  them." 

"  The  purest  churches  under  heaven  are  subject  both  to  mix- 
ture and  error ;  and  some  have  so  degenerated  as  to  become  no 
churches  of  Christ,  but  synagogues  of  Satan.  Nevertheless, 
there  shall  be  always  a  church  on  earth  to  worship  God  accord- 
ing to  his  will." 

We  proceed,  therefore,  to  the  main  question  before  us.  In 
what  does  that  succession  or  constitution,  by  which  the  church 
of  Christ  is  preserved  and  perpetuated,  essentially  consist  ?  Does 
it  terminate  on  the  officers  themselves,  as  is  taught  in  the  prelatic 
doctrine  of  apostolical  succession,  or  is  it  to  be  determined  by 
doctrines,  so  that  where  the  true  doctrines  of  Christ  are  found 
to  be  professed,  by  those  who  truly  live  in  accordance  with 
them,  there  we  may  safely  pronounce  this  succession  to  exist? 

Now  we  profess  to  believe,  as  Zanchius  expressed  it  in  the 
days  of  the  reformation,  that,  "  as  it  is  necessary  that  there  shall 
always  be  a  church  upon  earth,  because  Christ  hath  promised 
62 


490  THE    FAITH    OF   OUR   PURITAN   FATHERS.  [LECT.  XX. 

that  the  gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail  against  it ;  so  also  it  is 
every  way  as  necessary  that  a  lawful  ministry  be  preserved  ;  for 
the  one  cannot  be  separated  from  the  other,  neither  the  church 
from  the  ministry,  nor  the  ministry  from  the  church.  And 
hence  it  appears,  that  even  in  the  church  of  Rome,  though  the 
worship  of  God  be  most  corrupt,  yet  God  hath  preserved  so 
much  of  the  substance  of  religion,  as  was  necessary  to  salva- 
tion ;  so  that,  as  the  church  is  not  wholly  extinct  therein,  so 
neither  was  the  ministry.'" 

Thus,  also,  our  Puritan  and  nonconformist  fathers  declared 
themselves  :  "  We  say,  that  our  ministry  is  derived  to  us  from 
Jesus  Christ.  We  are  his  ministers  and  his  ambassadors.  It  is 
he  that  gave  pastors  and  teachers  to  the  church,  as  well  as 
apostles  and  evangelists.  We  say,  that  ordination  of  ministers 
by  ministers,  is  no  Romish  institution,  but  instituted  by  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  himself  long  before  antichrist  was.  That  our 
ministry  is  descended  to  us  from  Christ,  through  the  apostate 
church  of  Rome,  but  not  from  the  apostate  church  of  Rome.'' 
But  tlie  ministry,  which  is  an  institution  of  Christ  passing  to  us 
through  Rome,  is  not  made  null  and  void  ;  no  more  than  the 
scriptures,  sacraments,  or  any  other  gospel  ordinance,  which  we 
now  enjoy,  and  which  do  also  descend  to  us  from  the  apostles, 
through  the  Romish  and  other  corrupt  churches."^  This  claim 
to  the  true  ministry,  and,  therefore,  to  the  true  succession  of 
the  ministry,  not  in  exclusion  of  others,  but  in  a  state  of  greater 
purity  and  gospel  simplicity  than  is  found  in  many  prelatic  com- 
munions, we  shall  atierapt  to  make  good.  At  present,  howev- 
er, we  only  affirm  and  assert  the  fact,  that  on  our  principles,  the 
succession  of  the  church  is  not  endangered  by  the  undeniable 
corruption  of  the  Romish  hierarchy  ;  since  there  never  was  a 
period  when  the  Lord  had  not  preserved  to  himself,  within  the 
apostate  prelacy,  a  number,  both  among  the  presbyters  and  the 
laity,  sufficient  to  act  as  the  salt  and  the  leaven  of  his  church. 

But  on  the  system  of  prelacy,  as  we  have  shown,  there  is  not 
a  shred  of  well-grounded  confidence,  or  even  hope,  that  there  is 
any  true  church  now  existing  upon  the  earth  ;  or  a  single  valid- 
ly constituted  minister  in  the  whole  world  ;  and  consequently, 
no  certainty  that  any  individual  can,  according  to  God's  ordinary 
plan,  be  possibly  saved.  For,  if  this  succession  of  the  church  is 
bound  up  in  the  assured  certainty  of  an  unbroken  line  of  prelatic 

1)  Zanch.  in  Four  Praecep.  pp.  7,  sion  of  its  pretended    apostles,  who 
19.     This,  however,  is  a  very  different  were,  many  of  them,  aposlates. 
thing  from   a  personal  prelatical  3)  The  Div.  Right  of  the  Gospel 
SUCCESSION,  every  link   of  which   is  Min.  pt.  ii.  p.  33,   by  the    Provincial 
asserted  to  be  genuine  and  valid.  Assembly  in  Lond.  in  1654.      See  all 

2)  No  —  nor  through  the  succes-  chap.  iii. 


LECT.  XX.]    THE  FAITH  OF  THE  PRESBYTERIAN  CHURCH.        491 

bishops,  duly  consecrated  and  qualified,  then  the  perpetuity  of 
the  church  must  be  abandoned ;  for  that  christians,  in  the  first 
age  of  the  church,  never  saw  a  prelatic  bishop,  we  most  firmly 
believe. 

I.  What,  then,  we  would  in  the  first  place  ask,  is  essential 
to  the  being  of  a  church  ?  I.  And  first,  what  is  essential  to  the 
being  of  the  church,  considered  generally  ?  Our  confession  of 
faith  holds  this  language. 

"  The  catholic  or  universal  church,  which  is  invisible,  consists 
of  the  whole  number  of  the  elect,  that  have  been,  are,  or  shall  be 
gathered  into  one  under  Christ,  the  head  thereof;  and  is  the 
spouse,  the  body,  the  fulness  of  Him,  that  filleth  all  in  all.  The 
visible  church,  which  is  also  catholic  or  universal  under  the  gos- 
pel, (not  confined  to  one  nation,  as  before,  under  the  law,)  con- 
sists of  all  those  throughout  the  world,  that  profess  the  true  relig- 
ion, together  with  their  children  ;  and  is  the  kingdom  of  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  the  house  and  family  of  God,  out  of  which  there 
is  no  ordinary  possibility  of  salvation."^ 

In  the  Larger  Catechism,*  this  question  is  asked:  "Are  all 
they  saved  who  hear  the  gospel,  and  live  in  the  church  ?  Ans. 
All  that  hear  the  gospel,  and  live  in  the  visible  church,  are  not 
saved  ;  but  only  they  who  are  true  members  of  the  church  in- 
visible." Again.  "  What  is  the  visil)le  church  ?  Ans.  The 
visible  church  is  a  society  made  up  of  all  such  as,  in  all  ages  and 
places  of  the  world,  do  profess  the  true  religion,  and  of  their 
children." 

And,  again,  in  our  form  of  government,"*  the  same  doctrine  is 
laid  down.  "  Tlie  universal  church  consists  of  all  those  per- 
sons, in  every  nation,  together  with  their  cbildren,  who  make 
profession  of  the  holy  religion  of  Christ,  and  of  submission  to 
his  laws." 

"  As  this  immense  multitude  cannot  meet  together  in  one 
place,  to  hold  communion,  or  to  worship  God,  it  is  reasonable, 
and  warranted  by  scripture  example,  that  they  should  be  divid- 
ed into  many  particular  churches." 

So,  also,  in  the  Genevan  Confession,  which  was  approved  by 
the  church  of  Scotland,  in  the  beginning  of  the  reformation,  it  is 
taught, — "  but  that  church  which  is  visible,  and  seen  to  the 
eye,  hath  three  tokens  or  marks,  whereby  it  may  be  known. 
First,  the  word  of  God,  contained  in  the  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ments, which,  as  it  is  above  the  authority  of  the  same  church, 
and  only  sufficient  to  instruct  us  in  all  things  concerning  salva- 
tioch  ;  so  it  is  left  for  all  degrees  of  men  to  read,  and  understand  j 

1)  See  chap,  xxv.  §  i.  ii-.  3)  Seo  chapter  ii. 

2)  Quea.  01  and  03. 


492  THE   FAITH    OF    THE    EARLY    ENGLISH    CHURCH.     [lECT.  XX. 

for  without  this  word,  neither  church,  nor  council,  nor  decree, 
can  estabhsh  any  point  touching  salvation.'" 

The  doctrine  of  the  protestant  episcopal  church  on  this  sub- 
ject is  contained  in  the  nineteenth  of  the  Thirty-nine  Articles. 
"  The  visible  church  of  Christ  is  a  congregation  of  faithful  men, 
in  the  which  the  pure  word  of  God  is  preached,  and  the  sacra- 
ments be  duly  ministered,  according  to  Christ's  ordinance,  in  all 
those  things  that  of  necessity  are  requisite  to  the  same." 

"  As  the  church  of  Hierusalera,  Alexandria,  and  Antioch, 
have  erred  ;  so  also  the  church  of  Rome  hath  erred,  not  only  in 
their  living  and  manner  of  ceremonies,  but  also  in  matters  of 
faith."  Thus,  also,  in  one  of  the  prayers  appointed  to  be  used 
at  the  communion,  there  is  a  thanksgiving  to  Almighty  God, 
"  that  we  are  very  members  incorporate,  in  the  mystical  body 
of  his  Son,"  that  is,  the  church  "  which  is  the  blessed  com- 
pany OF  ALL  FAITHFUL  PEOPLE." 

In  the  "  Necessary  Doctrine  of  Erudition,"  the  title  of  a 
formulary  approved  by  the  bishops  of  England  in  1543,  and  set 
forth^  by  the  king's  majesty,  Henry  VIII.,  it  is  declared  : 
"  Wherefore  we  must  understand,  that  besides  the  inward  and 
secret  calling,  which  God  hath  always  used,  and  yet  still  doth 
use,  he  hath  also  ordained  an  outward  calling  of  the  people  unto 
him  by  preaching  of  his  most  holy  word  ;  upon  which  outward 
calling,  the  people's  yielding,  assenting,  and  obeying  to  the 
same  word  of  God,  and  receiving  it  also  with  true  faith,  and  the 
sacrament  of  baptism,  (as  Christ's  law  requireth,)  be  named  in 
scripture  ecclesia,  that  is  to  say,  an  assembly  of  people,  called 
out  from  other,  as  from  infidels  or  heathens,  to  one  faith  and 
confession  of  the  name  of  Christ,  which  word  ecclesia  is  in  Eng- 
lish called  church."  "  And  forasmuch  as  God  of  his  goodness 
calleth  people,  as  afore,  without  exception  of  persons  or  privi- 
lege of  place ;  therefore  this  holy  church  is  also  catholic,  that  is 
to  say,  not  limited  to  any  one  place  or  region  of  the  world,  but 
is  in  every  place  universally  through  the  world,  where  it 
pleaseth  God  to  call  people  to  him  in  the  profession  of  Christ's 
name  and  faith,  be  it  in  Europe,  Africa,  or  Asia.  And  all  these 
churches,  in  divers  countries  severally  called,  although  for 
knowledge  of  the  one  from  the  other  among  them,  they  have 
divers  additions  of  names,  and  for  their  most  necessary  govern- 
ment, as  they  be  distinct  in  places,  so  they  have  distinct  minis- 
ters and  divers  heads  in  earth,  governors,  and  rulers,  yet  be  all 
these  holy  churches  but  one  holy  church  catholic,  invited  and 

1)  See  Irving's  Conf.  of  Faith,  2)  See  Formularies  of  Faith  in 

p.  130.  the  reio-n  of  Henry  Vlll.  pp.  244,245, 

248,  Oxf  ed.  1825. 


LECT.  XX.]   THE  FAITH  OF  THE  EARLY  ENGLISH  CHURCH.      493 

called  by  one  God  the  Father  to  enjoy  the  benefit  of  redemption 
wrought  by  our  only  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  and  gov- 
erned by  one  Holy  Spirit,  which  teacheth  to  this  foresaid  holy 
church  one  truth  of  God's  holy  word  in  one  faith  and  baptism. 
And  this  church  is  relieved,  nourished  and  fortified  by  his  holy 
and  invincible  word  and  his  sacraments,  which  in  all  places  have 
each  of  them  their  own  proper  force  and  strength,  with  gifts  of 
graces  also  distributed  by  the  goodness  of  Almighty  God  in  all 
places,  as  to  his  wisdom  is  seen  convenient." 

"  It  is  to  be  noted,  that  this  Church  of  England,  and  other 
known  particular  churches,  in  which  Christ's  name  is  truly  hon- 
ored, called  on,  and  professed  in  faith  and  baptism,  be  members 
of  the  whole  catholic  church,  and  each  of  them  by  himself  is 
also  worthily  called  a  catholic  church,  when  they  merely  pro- 
fess and  teach  the  faith  and  religion  of  Christ,  according  to  the 
scripture  and  apostolic  doctrine.  And  so  every  christian  man 
ought  to  honor,  give  credence,  and  to  follow  the  particular 
church  of  that  region  so  ordered,  (as  afore,)  wherein  he  is  born 
or  inhabiteth." 

In  conformity  with  these  views  is  the  definition  of  the  church, 
given  by  Hooker:  "  Whereupon,  because  the  only  object  which 
separateth  ours  from  other  religions  is  Jesus  Christ,  in  whom 
none  but  the  church  doth  believe,  and  whom  none  but  the  church 
doth  worship,  we  find  that  accordingly  the  apostles  do  every 
where  distinguish  hereby  the  church  from  infidels  and  from  Jews ; 
accounting  them  which  '  call  njjon  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ'  to  be  his  church.  If  we  go  lower  we  shall  but  add  unto 
this  certain  casual  and  variable  accidents,  which  are  not 
properly  of  the  being,  but  make  only  for  the  happier  and 
better  being  of  the  church  of  God,  either  in  deed,  or  in  men's 
opinions  and  conceits.  This  is  the  error  of  all  popish  definitions 
that  hitherto  have  been  brought.  They  define  not  the  church 
by  that  which  the  church  essentially  is,  but  by  that  wherein  they 
imagine  their  own  more  perfect  than  the  rest  are."' 

1)  Eccl.  Pol.  b.  V.  §  Ixviii.  guided.  Concerning  every  of  these, 
"  For  our  constant  persuasion,"  somewhat  Christ  hath  commanded, 
says  Hooker,  (Eccl.  Pol.  b.  iii.  §  ii.  wi:ich  must  be  Itept  till  the  world's 
vol.  i.  p.  254,  Hanb.  edition,  p.  255,)  end.  On  the  contrary  side,  in  every 
"in  this  point,  is  as  theirs,  that  we  of  them,  somewhat  there  may  bead- 
have  no  where  altered  the  laws  of  ded,  as  the  cliurch  shall  judge  it  ex- 
Christ  further  than  in  such  particu-  pedient."  "  Whatsoever  Christ  hath 
larities  only  as  have  the  nature  of  commanded  for  ever  to  be  kept  in  his 
things  changeable  according  to  the  church,  the  same  we  take  not  upon 
difference  of  times,  places,  persons  us  to  abrogate  ;  and  whatsoever  our 
and  other  the  like  circumstances.  laws  have  thereunto  added  besides,  of 
Christ  hath  commanded  prayers  to  be  such  quality  we  hope  it  is  as  no  law 
made,  sacraments  to  be  ministered,  of  Christ  doth  any  where  condemn, 
his  church  to  be  carefully  taught  and  Wherefore,  that  all  may  be  laid  to- 


494  THE   FAITH   OF  THE   EARLY   ENGLISH   CHURCH.    [lECT.  XX. 

So  also  Burnet  on  the  Nineteenth  Article  says  :  "  The  second 
thing  to  be  considered  in  a  church  is,  their  association  together 
in  the  use  of  the  sacraments.  For  these  are  given  by  Christ  to 
the  society  as  the  rites  and  badges  of  that  body.  That  which 
makes  particular  men  believers,  is  their  receiving  the  fundamen- 
tals of  Christianity,  so  that  which  constitutes  the  body  of  the 
church,  is  the  profession  of  that  faith,  and  the  use  of  those  sacra- 
ments, which  are  the  rights  and  distinctions  of  those  who  pos- 
sess it.'" 

And  in  like  manner  Archbishop  Usher''  says :  "  The  calholic 
church  is  not  to  be  sought  for  in  any  one  angle  or  quarter  of  the 
world,  but  among  '  all  that  in  every  place  call  upon  the  name  of 
Jesus  Christ  our  Lord,  both  theirs  and  ours.'  (1  Cor.  i.  2.) 
Therefore,  to  their  Lord  and  ours  it  was  said,  '  ask  of  me,  and  1 
will  give  thee  the  heathen  for  thine  inheritance,'  k,c.  (Psalms 
ii.  8  ;)  and  to  this  mystical  body,  the  catholic  church,  accordingly, 
'  1  will  bring  thy  seed  from  the  east,  and  gather  them  from  the 
west ;  I  will  say  to  the  north,  give  up,  and  to  the  south,  keep 
not  back :  bring  my  sons  from  far,  and  my  daughters  from  the 
ends  of  the  earth.'  (Isaiah  xliii.  5-7.)  Thus  must  we  conceive 
of  the  catholic  church,  as  one  entire  body,  made  up  by  tlie  col- 
lection and  aggregation  of  all  the  faithful  unto  the  unity  there- 
of," &c. 

But  more  particularly,  to  take  one  or  two,  from  many  other 
apt  quotations,  which  we  might  make  from  the  work  of  this  emi- 
nently godly  and  learned  man,  he  thus  speaks  in  his  Sum  of  the 
Christian  Religion  : 

•''  Siixie  then,  God  doth  not  reveal  the  covenant  of  grace,  nor 
afford  sufficient  means  to  salvation  to  the  whole  world,  but  only 
to  the  church,  explain  here  what  you  mean  by  the  church." 

"We  speak  not  here  of  that  part  of  God's  church  which  is 
triumphant  in  glory  ;  who  being  in  perfect  fruition,  have  no  need 
of  these  outward  means  of  communion  with  him  ;  (Rev.  xxi.  22, 
23,)  but  the  subject  here  is  the  church  militant.  And  that  we 
consider  also  as  visible  in  the  parts  of  it ;  consisting  of  divers  as- 
semblies and  companies  of  believers,  making  profession  of  the. 
same  common  faith  ;  howbeit,  many  times,  by  force  of  persecu- 

gether  and   gathered  into  a  narrower  polity  it  cannot  [but  ?]  want."     "For 

room  :  First,  so  far  forth  as  the  church  in  these  things,  whereof  the  scripture 

is  the  mystical  body  of  Christ  and  his  appointeth  no  certainty,  the  use  of  the 

invisible  spouse,  it  needeth  no  exter-  people  of  God,  or  the  ordinances  of 

nal  polity.     That  very  part  of  the  law  our  fathers,  must  serve  for  a  law." 
divine  which  teachelh  faith  and  works  1)     Burnet   on    the    Thirty-nine 

of  righteousness,  is    itself  alone  suf-  Articles,  p  244. 

ficient  for  the  church  of  God  in  tliat  2)  Sermon  before  the  King,  on 

respect.     But  as  the  church  is  a  visi-  Eph.  iv.  13 
ble  society  and  body  politic,  laws  of 


LECT.  XX.]   THE  FAITH  OF  THE  EARLY  ENGLISH  CHURCH.       495 

tion,  the  exercise  of  public  ordinances  may,  for  a  time,  be  sus- 
pended among  them." 

"  Hath  Christ,  ti)en,  his  church  visible  upon  the  earth  ?" 

"  Yea,  throughout  the  world,  in  the  particular  congregations 
of  christians,  (Rom.  iii.  3,)  called  to  the  profession  of  the  true 
faith  and  obedience  of  the  gospel.  In  which  visible  assemblies, 
and  not  elsewhere,  the  true  members  of  the  true  church  invisible  on 
earth  are  to  be  sought,  (Rom.  xi.  5,)  and  unto  which,  therefore, 
all  that  seek  for  salvation  must  gladly  join  themselves."  (Esa. 
Ix.  4.) 

"  VVhat  are  the  marks  and  infallible  notes  whereby  to  discern 
the  true  visible  church,  with  which  we  may  safely  join  ? 

"First  and  principally  the  truth  of  doctrine  which  is  professed 
and  the  sincere  preaching  of  the  word,  together  with  the  due  ad- 
ministration of  the  sacraments,  according  to  the  commandment 
of  Christ,  our  Saviour.  Secondly,  the  right  order  which  is  kept, 
with  a  sincere  and  conscionable  obedience  yielded  to  the  word  of 
God." 

"  Why  do  you  make  the  first  to  be  the  principal  mark  of  visi- 
ble profession  ?  Because  they  are  the  only  outward  means  ap- 
pointed by  God  for  the  calling  and  gathering  of  the  saints,  and 
which  prove  the  church  to  be  2i  pillar  of  truth.  (Tim.  iii.  15."') 

The  same  doctrine  is  beautifuly  laid  down  by  Bishop  Hall. 
"And  we  shall  find  that  to  be  one  church,  wherein  is  an  agree- 
ment in  all  the  essentials  of  religion.  And  those  the  great  doc- 
tor of  the  Gentiles  hath  determined  to  be,  one  Lord,  one  faith, 
one  baptism  :  that  is,  a  subjection  to  one  Lord,  prescribed  in  the 
decalogue;  a  belief  of  the  same  articles  set  down  in  the  creed; 
a  joint  use  and  celebration  of  the  holy  sacraments,  the  initiatory 
whereof  is  baptism  :  so  as,  where  there  is  an  acknowledgment 
of  the  same  living  Lord,  the  God  of  heaven,  whom  we  profess 
to  depend  upon  for  all  things,  to  serve  and  obey  according  to  his 
commandments,  to  invoke  in  our  prayers  for  the  supply  of  all 
our  necessities ;  where  there  is  a  profession  of  the  same  faith  in 
all  the  main  points  of  christian  doctrine,  summed  up  in  that  sym- 
bol of  the  holy  apostles;  where  there  is  a  communion  in  the 
same  blessed  sacraments,  instituted  by  our  Lord  Jesus,  there  is 
one  and  the  same  church  of  Christ,  however  far  disterminate  in 
places,  however  segregated  and  infinitely  severalized  in  persons, 
however  differing  in  rites  and  circumstances  of  worship,  however 
squaring  in  by-opinion." 

"  This  is  a  truth,  which  is,  with  much  consent  and  serious  ve- 
hemence, inculcated  by  all  our  orthodox  divines  ;  amongst  whom 

1)  Usher's  Sum  and  Subst.  of  Chr.  Rel.  pp.  375,  376,  fol.  1677. 


496  THE   FAITH   OF   THE   EAELY   ENGLISH   CHURCH.     [lECT,  XX. 

none  have  so  fully  cleared  the  point,  as  the  late  honor  of  our 
schools,  the  learned  Bishop  Davenant,  in  that  last  golden  Trac- 
tate which  he  wrote,  now  breathing  towards  the  gates  of  his 
heaven,  his  pious  and  pithy  exhortation  of  the  evangelical 
churches  to  a  happy  peace ;  wherein  the  fundamentals  of  our 
faith  are  so  evidently  laid  open,  that  it  is  not  hard  to  judge  by  that 
unfailing  rule,  whom  we  may  and  must  admit  to  the  communion 
of  Christ's  church,  and  whom  we  ought  to  exclude  from  that 
holy  society." 

"  Doubtless  there  is  the  same  consideration  of  a  christian,  and 
of  a  church;  for,  what  is  a  church,  but  an  assembly  of  many 
true  believing  christians  ?  and  what  is  a  christian,  but  an  abridg- 
ment of  the  church,  or  a  church  contracted  into  one  bosom  ? 
The  number  makes  no  difference  in  the  essence." 

"  What  person  soever,  then,  after  his  due  matriculation  into 
God's  church,  professeth  to  be  built  upon  Christ,  the  true  corner- 
stone, to  receive  and  embrace  the  whole  truth  of  God  delivered 
in  the  sacred  monuments  of  the  prophets  and  apostles,  to  believe 
all  the  articles  of  the  christian  faith,  to  yield  himself  to  the  guid- 
ance of  that  Royal  Law,  to  call  upon  the  only  true  God  in  and 
through  Christ,  to  communicate  in  the  same  holy  sacraments, 
instituted  by  the  Lord  of  life,  cannot  but  be  acknowledged  a  true 
christian,  and  worthy  of  our  free  and  entire  communion." 

"  And  if  more  do  so,  to  the  making  up  of  a  whole  assembly, 
orderly  congregated  under  lawful  pastors,  what  can  debar  them 
of  the  title  and  privilege  of  a  true  christian  church  ?  "* 

These  quotations  might  be  multiplied  to  any  extent ;  but  this 
is  unnecessary,  as  it  is  not  our  present  purpose  fully  to  investi- 
gate this  matter,  but  merely  to  ascertain  what,  according  to  ap- 
proved authorities,  is  regarded  as  essential  to  the  being  of  a 
church.  These  characteristics  we  have  therefore  found  to  be, 
first,  sound  doctrine ;  secondly,  a  legitimate  ministry  ;  thirdly, 
the  proper  use  of  the  sacraments.^ 

1)  Wks.  vol.  viii.  pp.  48,  53.  Whitgift,  in   his    Defence   of  the 

2)  See  Acts  ii.  42,  xiv.  23,  and  Answer,  &-c.  says,  "  The  substance 
XX.  7;  Math.  x.xviii.  19.  See  also  and  matter  of  government  (Pref.) 
Harmony  of  Confessions  of  the  Ref.  must  indeede  be  taken  out  of  the 
Churches,  §  x.  pp.  204,  2.32,  ed.  1643.  worde  of  God,  and  consisteth  in  these 

It  may  be  well  to  give  some  au-  pointes,  that  the  worde  be  trulie  taught, 

thorities   in    substantiation   of   these  the  sacraments  rightlie  administered, 

conclusions  :  virtue  furthered,  vice  repressed,  and 

Stillingfleet,  in  his   Unreasonable-  the   church   kept    in    quietness   and 

ness  of  Separation,  according  to  Dr.  order." 

Owen,  in  his  Answer,  "gives  the  Well  enumerated  by  Dr.  Claggett, 
notes  of  a  true  church  to  be  the  pure  (Notes  of  the  Ch.  p.  192.)  "  But  some 
preachinff  of  the  word,  and  the  ad-  of  them  are  necessary  to  the  being  of 
ministration  of  the  sacraments,  ac-  the  church ;  and  they  are  the  ac- 
cording to  Christ's  institution."  Ow-  knowledgment  of  the  one  Lord,  tlie 
en's  Wks.  vol.  xx.  p.  280.  profession  of  one  faith,  and  admission 


LECT.  XX.]  WHAT   CONSTITUTES   A    TRUE    MINISTRY. 


497 


2.  This  leads  us  to  inquire,  secondly,  what  is  essential  to  the 
being  of  the  church,  as  it  regards  its  ministers?  Who  are  to  be 
understood  by  legitimate  ministers  ?  Now  they  are  to  be  esteem- 
ed as  true  ministers  of  Clirist  who  have  been  called  to  the  work 
according  to  divine  appointment ;  who  discharge  the  duties  of 
their  office  as  laid  down  in  the  word  of  God  ;  preaching  the 
truth  in  its  purity  ;  administering  the  sacraments  in  the  true 
spirit  of  their  institution  ;  and  governing  the  church  according  to 
the  rules  laid  down  by  Christ. 

That  a  lawful  ministry  is  not  limited  to  prelates,  has  been 
already  fully  shown.  That  it  refers  specially  to  presbyter- 
bishops,  that  is,  ministers  who  preach,  govern,  ordain,  and  admin- 
ister the  sacraments,  we  will  attempt  to  prove  in  the  continuation 
of  our  course.  And,  therefore,  we  conclude  that  this  ministry 
embraces  prelates  only  because  they  are  presbyters,  and  only 
when  they  are  otherwise  duly  qualified.  They  are  lawful  minis- 
ters in  whom  the  forementioned  qualities  are  combined  ;  by  what- 
ever name,  order,  or  degree  they  may  be  technically  designated.' 

Say  the  Puritan  authors  of  the  Ad- 
monition to  Parliament,  in  1572,  (Pref- 
in  Price's  Hist  Prot.  Nonconf.  i.  p- 
223,)  "  For  to  speak  of  that  wherein 
the  best  consent,  and  whereupon  all 
good  writers  accord.  The  outward 
marks  whereby  a  true  christian  church 
is  known,  are,  preaching  of  the  word 
purely,  ministering  of  the  sacraments 
sincerely,  and  ecclesiastical  discipline, 
which  consisteth  in  admonition  and 
correcting  of  faults  severely." 

See  a  chapter  on  what  is  necessary 
to  the  constitution, administration  and 
communion  of  single  churches,  in 
Baxter's  True  and  Only  Way  of  Con- 
cord. Lond   1G8I,  p.  228,  &c. 

See  lull  on,  in  Voetius  Desperata 
Causa  Papatus,  Amst.  \Q'Vi,  lib.  iii. 
See  particularly  §  i.  cap.  vii.  p.  446. 
See  also  Leslie's  Short  Method  with 
the  Romanists.  1835,  Edinb.  pp.  50 
and  182. 

See  further.  Bishop  Bull's  Vind.  of 
Ch.  of  Eng.  pn.  155, 15G,  158;  Bishop 
Sherlock  in  Notes  of  the  Chr.  Exam, 
and  Ref.  pp.  1,  3.  9;  Div.  Right  of 
the  Min.  pp.  30,  34,  35,  38,  40,  42, 
44. 

1)  Our  form  of  g-overnment  thus 
describes  the  ministers  of  the  sanc- 
tuary : 

"The  pastoral  office  is  the  first 
in  the  church,  both  for  dignity  and 
usefulness.  The  person  rcho  fills  this 
office,  hath,  in  scripture,  obtained  dif- 
ferent names  expressive  of  his  various 


into  the  state  of  christian  duties  and 
privileges  by  one  baptism." 

"  Nor  is  there  any  incongruity  in 
maintaining,  that  while  an  outward 
framework  has  been  by  divine  provi- 
dence supported  for  preserving  due 
order  in  the  visible  church,  the  special 
object  of  the  divine  protection  through 
every  age  should  be  that  aggregate  of 
pious  christians  who,  in  various  cir- 
cumstances, and  in  distant  places,  are 
yet  united  together  in  one  christian 
community  by  their  common  engraft- 
ment  into  the  vine  of  the  gospel."  , 
Dr.  George  Miller's  Letter  to  Dr. 
Pusey,  p.  24. 

Calvin  gives  the  notes  of  a  church 
to  be  the  pure  preaching  of  the  word, 
(Owen  Wks.  vol.  xx.  p.  280,)  and  the 
administration  of  the  sacraments  ac- 
cording unto  Christ's  institution. 
Where  these  are,  he  allow.s  a  true 
church  to  be,  not  only  witliout  dio- 
cesan episcopacy,  but  in  a  form  and 
under  a  rule  opposite  unto  it,  and  in- 
consistent with  it. 

Calvin's  words  are,  (ibid,)  "  1  would 
in)t  give  countenance  unto  errors,  no, 
not  to  the  least,  so  as  to  cherish  them 
by  flattery  or  connivance.  But  though 
I  say,  that  the  church  is  not  to  be  for- 
saken lor  triHing  ditTerences,  wherein 
the  doctrine  (of  the  gospel)  is  retained 
safe  and  sound,  wherein  the  integrity 
of  godliness  doth  abide,  and  the  use 
of  the  sacraments  appointed  of  the 
Lord  is  preserved " 

63 


498         THE  XXXIX  ARTICLES  RECOGNIZE  OTHER  MINISTERS.  [lECT.  XX. 

They  are  described  in  the  nineteenth  of  the  Thirty-nine  Arti- 
cles, as  those  "  who  preach  the  pure  word  of  God,  and  duly 
minister  the  sacramenis."  In  the  twenty-third  article  it  is  de- 
clared, "  It  is  not  lawful  for  any  man  to  take  upon  him  the  office 
of  public  preaching,  or  ministering  the  sacraments  in  the  congre- 
gation, before  he  be  lawfully  called,  and  sent  to  execute  the 
same.  And  those  we  ought  to  judge  lawfully  called  and  sent, 
which  be  chosen  and  called  to  this  work  by  men  who  have  pub- 
lic authority  given  unto  them  in  the  congregation,  to  call  and 
send  ministers  into  the  Lord's  vineyard." 

The  ministers  of  other  reformed  churches  are  here  not  only 
recognized  as  true,  but  it  is  made  obligatory  upon  every  one 
who  adopts  these  articles,  to  acknowledge  and  receive  them  "  as 
lawfully  called  and  sent."  "Those"  ministers  "we  ought  to 
judge  lawfully  called  and  sent  which  are,"  he.  That  this  arti- 
cle was  designed  to  extend  to  the  njinisters  of  all  the  reformed 
churches,  we  have  the  most  unexceptionable  evidence,  as  has 
been  already  shown,  in  the  testimony  of  Bishop  Burnet.'  The 
article  was  framed  on  the  principle  of  comprehension,  and  with 
a  designed  indefiniteness,  leaving  the  manner  in  which  such  min- 
isters have  "  public  authority "  given  to  them  undetermined. 
This  interpretation  is  rendered  certain  by  the  course  pursued  in 
that  church  for  at  least  fifty  years  after  the  article  was  framed  ; 
by  the  testimony  of  its  best  and  greatest  divines ;  and  by  the  ex- 
isting laws  in  which  these  principles  are  expressly  avowed.* 

Archbishop  Usher  asks  the  question  —  "whom  hath  Christ 
appointed  to  be  governors  and  guides  unto  the  rest?"  which  he 
answers  thus  :  "  Church  officers  and  ministers  appointed  to  teach 
and  govern  the  flock  of  Christ,  and  to  feed  it  with  the  whole- 
some food  of  the  word  and  sacraments.  (1  Cor.  xii.  18:  1 
Tim.  V.  17 :  John  xxi.  15  :  1  Peter  v.  2.)^ 

duties.     As   he   has  the  oversight  of  penses  the   manifold   grace  of  God, 

the    flock   of    Christ,   he   is    termed  nnd    the    ordinances    instituted    by 

bishop.     As  he  feeds  them  with  spir-  Christ,  he  is  termed  steward  of  the 

itual  food,  he  is  termed  pastor.     As  mysteries  of  God."      Ch.  iv.  pp.  408, 

he  serves  Christ  in  his  church,  he  is  409. 

termed  minister.     As  it  U  his  duty  to  1)  See  on  the  Art.  pp.  336,  338^ 

be  grave  and  prudent,  and  an  example  and  Records,  in  Lond.  Chr.  Obs.  Feb, 

of  the  flock,  and  to  govern  well  in  the  1838,  p.  86.     This  is  admitted  by  Dr. 

house  and   kingdom  of  Christ,  he  is  Pusey  in  his  Letter  to  the  Bishop  of 

termed  presbyter  or  elder.     As  he  is  Oxford,  p.  98,  and  in  Oxford  Tr.  No. 

the  messenger  of  God,  he  is  termed  81,  p.  27,  Note. 

the  angel   of  the  church.     As  he   is  2)  See  Div.  Right  of  the   Min. 

sent  to  declare  the  will  of  God  to  sin-  pt.  ii.  pp.  18,  19,  21,  23,  59 ;  and  Pow- 

ners,  and  to  beseech  them  to  be  recon-  ell  on  Ap.  Sue.  ch. ;  Dr.  Miller  on  the 

ciled   to  God   through   Christ,  he  is  Min.  «Sz;c.  &c.  &c. 

termed  ambassador.     And,  as  he  dis-  3)  See  ut  Supra,  p.  377. 


LECT.  XX.]     PRELATES  NEVER  MADE  ESSENTIAL  TO  A  CHDRCH.  499 

The  reformed  churches  harmonized  in  the  belief  that  minis- 
ters constitute  an  essential  part  of  tlie  church,  considered  as  vis- 
ible and  regularly  organized  —  that  they  must  be  lawfully  called 
to  their  work  by  the  public  authority  of  the  church  ;  and  that 
they  are  bound  faithfully  to  preach  God's  word  and  duly  to 
dispense  his  ordinances.' 

Sure  we  are,  if  the  most  impartial  authorities  are  to  be  relied 
upon,  that  no  where  in  the  earliest  fathers  of  the  christian 
church,  can  there  be  found  any  authority  whatever,  for  making 
a  lineal  succession  of  prelates  essential  to  the  being  of  h  true 
church.^  In  whatever  variety  of  meanings  they  may  use  the 
term  church,  (^ecdesia,)  yet  do  they  not  employ  it  in  such  a 
sense  as  this.  And  although,  in  some  instances,  the  term  is 
used  to  designate  the  believing  people  in  contradistinction  to 
the  clergy  ^  —  yet  never  is  it  employed  where  the  clergy  alone, 
to  the  exclusion  of  other  representatives  of  the  church,  are 
understood.  The  word  is  commonly  applied  by  them  to  a  par- 
ticular society  of  christians,  meeting  together  in  one  place  under 
their  proper  pastors,  for  the  performance  of  religious  worship, 
and  the  exercise  of  christian  discipline.* 

Launoy,  a  learned  Romish  writer,  "  proves  unanswerably 
and  by  numerous  testimonies  of  every  age,"  says  Dr.  Claggett,* 
"  that  from  the  apostles'  times  till  the  council  of  Trent,  the  con- 
stant universal  doctrine  concerning  the  church  was  this,  that  it 
is  '  the  society  of  the  faithful,'  without  ever  inserting  into  the 
definition  of  it  any  thing  relating  to  its  being  united  to  the  pope, 
or  any  other  bishop,  as  to  a  visible  head.  Nay,  secondly,  that 
all  the  most  learned  lovers  of  antiquity,  and  godly  opposers  of 
novelty,  in  the  Roman  communion,  both  in  the  time  of  the 
council  of  Trent,  and  ever  since,  have  retained  that  notion  of 
the  church,  and  stuck  to  the  ancient  definition." 

"  What  is  the  church  ?  "  asks  the  present  bishop  of  London. 
"  There  is  hardly  a  mistake  more  injurious  to  the  interests  of 
christian  charity,  or  one  which  has  more  effectually  impeded  the 
progress  of  the  gospel,  and  prevented  that  gospel  from  having 

1)  See  Harmony  of  Conf.  at  Su-  and  the  fathers  generally  in  Marechal's 
pra,  §  xi.  pp.  233,  '269.  Concordantia  Sanct.  Fatr.  Gr.  et  Lat. 

2)  See  King  on  the  Primitive  torn.  i.  and  ii.  as  per  index,  in  nomine 
Church,  chap.  i.  Ecclesia.  August.  Vindel,  1769. 

3)  Euseb.  lib.  vii.  cap.  xxx.  Ma-  "  1  call  the  church  liie  congregation 
carius  Horn.  xii.  applies  it  to  one  soul,"  of  the  elect,"  ad^ofj-jux  tmv  wxsxTaiv. 
Kxt  iTTi  fjMi  4"/^^-  Chrysostom  in  Ps.  Clem.  Alex.  str.  p.  514,  in  Dr.  Barrow 
See  others  in  fciuiceri  Tiies.  torn.  i.  p.  vol.  i.  p.  762. 

105.  5)  In  his  Ep.  par.  viii.  p.  353,  to 

4)  The  sentiments  of  the  Greek  Nee.  Gatinaus,  in    Notes  of  the  Cb. 
fathers  may  be  seen  fully  collected  in  pp.  186,  188. 
SucceriThesauruSjtom.i.  p.l049,&c., 


500 


PRELATES   NOT    ESSENTIAL    TO    A   CHURCH.       [lECT.  XX. 


free  course,  and  being  glorified,  as  it  will  be  glorified  when  it 
has  free  course,  than  that  erroneous  opinion  which  certainly  has 
prevailed,  1  would  almost  say  universally  —  but  very  generally, 
and  I  fear,  still  too  widely  prevails,  —  that  the  church  is  the 
clergy." 

"  The  church  !  Am  I  asked  again,  what  is  the  church  ?  The 
ploughman  at  his  daily  toil ;  the  workman  who  plies  his  shuttle  ; 
the  merchant  in  his  counting-house  ;  the  scholar  in  his  study  ; 
the  lawyer  in  the  courts  of  justice  ;  the  senator  in  the  hall  of 
the  legislature ;  the  monarch  on  his  throne ;  these,  as  well  as 
the  clergyman,  in  the  works  of  the  material  building,  which  is 
consecrated  to  the  honor  of  God,  —  these  constitute  the  church. 
The  church,  as  defined  by  our  articles,  '  is  a  congregation  of 
faithful  inen,  in  which  the  pure  word  of  God  is  preached,  and 
the  sacraments  duly  administered.'  '" 

No  one  will  presume  to  affirm  that  any  passage  can  be  pro- 
duced from  the  New  Testament  in  which  the  order  of  prelates, 
in  consociation  with  two  inferior  orders  subject  to  them,  is  de- 
clared to  be  of  the   essence  of  a  true  church  of  Jesus   Christ. 


])  SirMichaelFoster,  Knt.  inhis 
Exam,  of  Bishop  Gibson's  Codex  Ju- 
ris Eccl.  Angl.  p.  98,  repudiates  tills 
meanin<{  of  tiie  term  wiiich  confines 
it  to  the  clergy,  as  "  the  sense  in  whicii 
the  corruption,  ignorance  and  super- 
stition of  succeeding  ages  have  used 
that  word,"  and  not  as  the  Church  of 
England  understands  it,  "  the  body  or 
congregation  of  the  faithful."  Well 
Jie  might,  as  will  appear  from  what 
follows  :  "  The  church  does  not  teach 
any  thing  contrary  to  scripture,  and 
we  also  MAY  NOT  interpret  scripture 
contrary  to  her."  Tract  No.  159  of 
the  Prot.  Episcop.  Tr.  Soc.  p.  13. 

Herbert  Croft,  Bishop  of  Hereford, 
in  his  Naked  Truth,  says,  (Scott's  Col. 
of  Tr.  vol.  vii.  p.  2SJi  :)  "The  gates 
of  hell  shall  not  prevail  against  the 
church.  1  grant,  what's  this  to  a 
general  council.'  Not  the  thous- 
andth part  of  the  clergy,  not  the 
thousandth  part  of  the  church,  which 
in  scripture  is  always  put  for  the 
whole  body  of  the  faithful,  though  of 
late  it  be  translated  into  quite  another 
notirtn,and  taken  for  the  clergy  only." 

''  The  church,"  snys  the  ever-memo- 
rable John  Hales,  (Tracts,  Lond  1721, 
pp.  198  and  202.)  "as  it  imports  a 
visible  company  on  earth,  is  nothing 
else  but  the  coinpanj'  of  professors  of 
Christianity,  wheresoever  dispersed  in 


the  earth.  To  define  it  thus  by  mon- 
archy, under  one  visible  head,  is  of 
novelty  crept  up,  since  men  began  to 
change  the  spiritual  kingdom  of  Christ 
to  secular  pride  and  tyranny;  and  a 
tiling  never  heard  of,  either  in  the 
scriptures,  or  in  the  writings  of  the 
ancients.  Government,  whether  by 
one  or  many,  or  howsnever,  if  it  be 
one  of  the  clrirch's  contingent  attri- 
butes, it  is  all;  certainly,  it  is  no 
necessary  pro|)erly,  much  less  comes 
it  int')  the  definition  and  essence  of 
it."  "  To  speak  the  truth  at  once  ;  all 
these  questions  concerning  the  notes, 
the  visibility,  the  government  of  the 
church,  if  we  look  upon  the  substance 
and  nature  of  the  church,  they  are 
merely  idle  and  impertinent;  if  upon 
the  end  why  ienrned  men  do  handle 
them,  it  is  nothing  else  but  iaction." 
How  beautifully  does  this  stand  out 
from  the  dark  ground  of  the  following 
picture  :  "  Christians  iinivers;illy,  for 
fit'teen  centuries,  considered  the  priest- 
hood, in  the  orders  of  bishops,  priests 
and  deacons,  as  one  of  the  essential 
characteristics  of  the  church  ;  and 
considered  the  reception  of  the  ordi- 
nances administered  by  this  priest- 
hood as  the  DIVINELY  APFOINI  ED  MOUE 
OF    ENTERING     INTO     COVENANT     WITH 

God."  Bishop  Hobart  in  Coll.  of 
Essays  on  Episco.  N.  Y.  ISOG,  Prf.  p.  7. 


LECT.  XX.]  WHO   ARE    TRULY   MINISTERS    OF   CHRIST.  601 

"The  church  in  scripture/'  alluding  at  present  to  that  particu- 
lar meaning  which  bears  upon  our  subject,  "signifies  the  whole 
society  of  christians  throughout  the  world,  including  all  who 
profess  their  belief  in  Christ,  and  who  are  subject  to  lawful  pas- 
tors,"—  (as  1  Cor.  X.  32:  and  xii.  28.)  Such  is  the  conclu- 
sion of  Mr.  Palmer,  the  most  learned  advocate  of  prelatic  claims 
of  the  present  times.'  The  characteristics  of  a  true  minister, 
as  given  in  the  divine  word,  are  holiness  of  life,  the  call  of  God, 
and  soundness  of  doctrine.  The  commission  of  the  sacred 
office  is  to  be  addressed  only  to  faithful  men — who  are  com- 
petent to  teach  the  true  faith  to  others  also.  Those  only,  as 
was  maintained  by  the  Waldenses,  "are  the  successors  of  the 
aposiles  who  imitate  their  lives. ""^  Those  only  can  be  true, 
christian,  and  valid  ministers  of  Jesus  Christ,  who  have  received 
a  true  call  to  the  ministry.  But  he  only  is  truly  called,  who 
gives  sensible  and  credible  evidence  of  possessing  the  qualifica- 
tions laid  down  in  scripture.  They,  therefore,  who  enter  the 
ministry  by  simony,^  or  in  the  known  character  of  ignorant, 
immoral,  or  heretical  men,  never  had  any  such  call,  and  could 
not  receive  it  from  the  ceremony  of  ordination,  which  is  only 
efficacious  in  delegating  any  really  official  authority,  where  such 

INWARD  FITNESS  HAS  BEEN  CREDIBLY  PROFESSED.  Ordina- 
tion implies,  and  proceeds  upon  the  supposition  of,  this  previous 
call.  It  is  nothing  more  than  a  solemn  recognition  of  it."*  All, 
therefore,  who  have  been  ordained  without  such  call,  were  not 
ministers  lawfully  called.  Their  consecration  was  invalid  in  the 
courts  of  heaven,  and  a  mockery.  And  thus,  as  we  have  before 
shown,  is  the  whole  line  of  prelatic  successionists  thrown  into 
irreparable  confusion.^ 

1)  See  Palmer  on  the  Ch.  vol.  i.  withoutconcealmentor  shame  :  I  shall 
p.  4.  therefore  mention  only  one  holy  fnth- 

2)  See  Schism,  ch.  vii.  p.  36,  «fec.  er,  who  made  the  most  of  his  jus  pat- 
Note,  roniitus,  that   could    be   made.     It  is 

See    also    Gobat,   in    his    Abys-  Boniface  IX.    Of  this  man,  who  sat  in 

sinia,  p.  146.  the  papal  chair  from  1:589  to  1404,  all 

3)  "  Need  I  urge  any  ])roofs  the  iiiitorians  say,  that  he  bestowed 
(Presb.  Letters,  pp.  <?54,'2')H,)  that  the  church  preferments,  as  we  bestow 
popes  practised  simony  without  shame  goods  at  an  auction,  on  the  highest 
and    without    measure.      Several    of  bidder." 

themselves    bought    the    pontificate.  4)  See   Powell   on  Ap.  Succ.  p. 

Do  you  think  the  conscience  of  such  132,  »&n.     Mr   Palmer  on  the  Ch.  vol. 

worthies  was  so  very  delicate  as   not  i.  p.  16.'),  proves  the  necessity  of  such 

to  permit  them  to  make  tlie  most  they  a  call,  and   that   the  want  of  it  alone 

could  of  thfir  bnrgain  .'     Would  those  disqualifies  for  the  ministry.  Seepage 

who  bought   a  bishopric,  give  away  168.    See  Note  A. 
the  bishoprics,  which   were    at    their  5)  See  a  full  discussion  of  what  is 

dispiisal,  for  nothing.'     It  isaltoffether  necessary  to  the  beinsr  of  the  ministry 

uiimcessary  to  produce  particular  ex-  in    Baxter's  True  atid   Only  Way  of 

amples  of  what  all  the  world  knows  Concord,  Lond.  ICbO,  pt.  ii.  ch.  v.  p. 

to    have    been    practised    generally,  204,  &c. 


502    WHAT  IS  NOT  ESSENTIAL  TO  THE  BEING  OF  A  CHURCH.    [lECT.  XX. 

II.  Having  thus  shown,  positively,  what  is  essential  to  the 
being  of  a  christian  church,  both  as  it  regards  the  church  gen- 
erally and  its  ministers  specially,  we  will  now  proceed  to  show 
negatively,  as  far  as  is  needful  to  our  purpose,  what  is  not  essen- 
tial to  the  being  of  a  church. 

1.  We  affirm,  therefore,  that  unity  of  communion,  or  union  in 
the  same  christian  denomination,  so  as  to  be  in  subjection  to  any 
one  earthly  head,  government,  or  discipline,  is  not  essential  to 
the  being  of  a  true  christian  church. 

It  is,  indeed,  asserted  as  a  fundamental  doctrine,  that  all 
churches  and  ministers  not  visibly  within  the  pale  of  the  prelacy, 
either  Romish,  Anglican,  Greek,  or  Oriental,  are  by  the  very 
fact  of  their  separation,  cut  off  from  these  catholic  churches,  and 
totally  excluded  from  the  church  of  Christ.  Now  this  doctrine 
we  altogether  reject,  on  the  grounds  already  at  length  exhibited, 
and  because  it  is  alike  contrary  to  the  scriptures,  to  the  best 
fathers,  to  the  sentiments  of  the  greatest  divines  of  all  ages  and 
countries,  to  the  facts  of  ecclesiastical  history,  and  to  the  prac- 
tice, and  present  character,  of  these  churches  themselves,  which 
are  not  thus  united  ;  which  acknowledge  no  common  head  or 
jurisdiction  ;  which  are,  on  the  contrary,  disunited,  and  excom- 
municated, the  one  by  the  other.' 

And  here,  if  our  premises  are  disputed,  we  "require"  these 
anathematizing  prelatists  to  define  what  is  meant  by  funda- 
mental, and  to  prove  that  their  definition  of  the  church,  as 
including  prelacy,  is  correct;  and  that  all  other  definitions  are 
incorrect.  We  next  ask  them  to  produce  the  rule,  by  wliich 
such  fundamentals  are  to  be  ascertained,  and  to  prove  that  rule, 
and  to  prove  that  all  other  rules  are  wrong. ^  When  these 
requirements,  which  they  themselves  have  instructed  us  to  make, 
shall  have  been  answered  ;  and  there  shall  be  then  left  any  re- 
Ministers  only  essential  as  a  means  no  saccession,  and  therefore  succes- 
for  the  promulgation  of  the  trutii.  cion  cannot  be  essential  to  the  being 
See  Ad  Pacem  Keel.  Adhortatio  of  of  a  church.  But  there  never  was  a 
Bishop  Davenant,  Cant.  lt)40,  pp.  63,  time  when  true  doctrine  was  not 
64.  necessary ,  nor  was  there  ever  a  church 

See  "  A  Treatise  of  the  Church,"  without  it;  and  hence  it  is  essential. 
&c.,  written  by  M.  Bertrande  de  And  in  like  manner  there  was  a  peri- 
Loque,  of  Dolphinee ;  imprinted  at  od  in  the  early  history  of  the  church, 
London,  1581,  ch.  v.  p.  24;  where  when,  as  our  opponents  allow, churches 
this  point  is  well  argued  :  in  Old  existed,  and  were  organized  without 
South  Library.  prelates,  and  hence   prelates  are  not 

Voetius  gives  nine  reasons  why  a  essential  to  the  being  of  the  church, 
personal  succession  of  pastors  cannot  1)   We   propose  a  fuller   investi- 

be  essential  to  the  being  of  the  church,  gation  of  this  subject  in  an  examina- 
in  his  Desperata  Causa  Papatus,  Amst.  tion  of  the  Notes  or  Notitia  of  the 
1635,  lib.  ill.  §  i.  cap.  is.  Church. 

There  was  a  time  when  there  were  2)  This  is  the  course  laid  down 

christian  churches,  which,  as  yet,  had      in  Palmer  on  the  Ch.  vol.  i.  p.  127. 


LECT.  XX.]     UNION  UNDER  ONE  GOVERNMENT  NOT  ESSENTIAL.  503 

siduum  of  such  prelatic  assumptions,  to  give  uneasiness  to  the 
body  of  the  christian  church,  it  will  be  time  enough  to  adminis- 
ter some  corrective. 

This  doctrine  of  ecclesiastical  unity,  from  which  it  is  inferred 
that  there  cannot  be  in  any  one  country  or  community,  several 
different  churches  authorized  by  God  and  united  to  Christ  —  is 
the  doctrine  of  the  apostolical  succession  carried  out,  as  is 
allowed,  to  one  of  its  legitimate  conclusions ;  and  will  further 
illustrate  to  you  the  exorbitant  bigotry  and  intolerance  of  a  sys- 
tem which  would  thus  separate  from  the  body  of  Christ  every 
church  in  Charleston,  and  in  these  United  States,  except  the  pro- 
testant  episcopal  churches.^  Having,  therefore,  overthrown  the 
premises,  upon  which  this  conclusion  rests,  it  is  unnecessary  to 
enter  fully  into  an  exposure  of  this  most  groundless  and  absurd 
inference  from  them.  The  glaring  sophistry,  with  which  the 
argument  is  conducted,  will  be  apparent  to  any  one  who  will 
attentively  peruse  any  prelatic  treatise  on  the  characteristic 
marks  of  the  church  of  Christ.^  The  premises  are  laid  down, 
as  for  instance,  thus  :  All  christians  are  united  to  Christ  in  one 
heavenly  family.  They  are  thus  bound  to  cultivate  towards 
each  other  a  spirit  of  love,  charity  and  kindness,  and  to  render 
towards  one  another  all  offices  of  christian  confraternity.  The 
primitive  churches,  however  divided  by  space,  were  united  in 
heart,  affection,  and  in  cooperation  for  the  spread  of  the  gos- 
pel. This  union  is  made  an  essential  mark  of  Christ's  church, 
and  imperatively  enjoined  upon  all  Christ's  disciples. 

Such  are  the  premises,  in  whose  truth  and  importance  we  all 
concur,  and  whose  necessity  cannot,  at  this  time,  be  too  earnestly 
pleaded. 

Now  from  these  premises,  two  very  different  inferences  may 
be  deduced.  The  first,  and  which  is  the  only  one  sanctioned  by 
scripture,  reason,  or  history,  is,  that  however  different  churches 
may  be  separated  from  each  other  in  regard  to  place,  so  long  as 
these  several  churches  hold  the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus,  they  should 
be  all  united  in  love,  charity,  and  mutual  kindness,  without  any 
one  church  attempting  a  dominion  over  the  faith  of  the  others, 
or  claiming  over  them  any  supremacy  of  right  or  prerogative. 
Thus  would  they  keep  the  unity  of  the  faith  in  the  bonds  of 
peace;  thus  would  they  be  found  helpers  of  each  other's  joy; 
and  thus  would  they  work  together,  as  the  different  members  of 
one  body,  of  which  Christ  is  the  only  Head,  in  fulfilling  the 
purposes  of  his  heavenly  will. 

The  other   inference  which,   with  the  greatest  violence  to  all 

1)  Palmer,  vol.  i.  p.  63,  and  pt.  i.  2)  e.  g.  Palmer,  vol.  i.  p.  46,  &c. 

chap.  iv. 


504  UNION  UNDER  ONE  GOVERNMENT  NOT  ESSENTIAL.    [lECT.  XX. 

ri^ht  reasoning,  has  been  deduced  from  these  premises,  is,  that, 
therefore,  there  is  but  one  authorized  body  of  which  prelates  are 
the  exchisive  governors,  and  in  subjection  to  which  alone,  any- 
covenanted  salvation  can  be  obtained.  Of  course  separation 
from  the  prelacy  is  elevated  to  the  sublimity  of  a  schism  against 
the  body  of  Clirist;  —  and  is  made  to  involve  its  guilty  per- 
petrators in  inexpiable  and  hopeless  ruin.  But  for  such  a  con- 
clusion there  is  nothing  whatever  in  the  premises  ;  —  nothing  in 
the  Bible  ;  nothing  in  the  early  history  of  the  apostolic  churches. 
It  is  a  dogma,  which  owes  its  origin  to  the  later  fathers.  It  is  the  off- 
spring of  sacerdotal  pride  and  ambition.  It  was  cradled  in  the  lap  of 
a  fast  advancing  corruption  of  christian  doctrine  and  of  order ;  — 
and  matured  under  the  fostering  care  of  a  remorseless  spiritual  des- 
potism, of  which  this  was  the  most  destructive  element  —  the 
mainspring  of  its  whole  machinery.  The  unity  of  the  scriptures 
has  no  reference  to  mere  external  uniformity.  It  is  a  spiritual 
unity  —  binding  together  in  one  mass  —  the  minds  and  hearts 
of  all  who,  in  every  place,  call  upon  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
both  theirs  and  ours.'  "The  key  to  real  unity,  must  be  sought  in 
the  reply,  which  the  New  Testament  gives  to  the  questions 
already  proposed.  Who  is  a  christian  and  what  is  the  church  ? 
From  this  source,  we  learn  that  a  christian  is  a  spiritual  man  ; 
and  that  the  church  of  Christ  is  a  spiritual  institution.  Hence 
the  unity  of  the  church  is  a  spiritual  unity.  A  christian  is  such 
from  the  state  of  his  mind  and  heart.  A  christian  church  is  a 
society  composed  of  persons  whose  minds  and  hearts  are  spiritual. 
Tlie  true  unity  of  the  church,  therefore,  is  not  formal,  geographi- 
cal, political,  or  dependent  on  any  human  laws;  it  is  a  unity 
which  has  its  seat  in  the  minds  and  hearts  of  men.  Its  centre 
is  Christ,  the  Head  of  the  church.  Its  producing  agent  is  the 
Spirit  of  God.  It  reigns  through  the  medium  of  the  truth, 
received  by  faith.  Its  conservative  principle  is  devotion.  Its 
bond  is  the  common  sympathy  of  regenerate  natures  —  the 
attraction  of  minds,  kindred  in  moral  tastes,  purposes,  and 
interests.     Its  spontaneous  and  proper  manifestation  is  love." 

This  prelatic  dogma  of  ecclesiastical  unity — the  real  source 
and  origin  of  almost  all  scriptural  discord  and  division ;  and 
the  ffuilty  parent  of  the  most  enormous  atrocities  which  have 
ever  been  perpetrated  ;  as  it  is  entirely  without  foundation  in 
the  word  of  God,  so  is  it  without  sanction  in  the  history  of  the 
primitive  church.  —  It  is  not  contained  or  implied,  in  any  article 
of  the  most  ancient  extant  creeds.     This  doctrine  is  contrary  to 

])  See  this  subject  fully  and  Union,  by  Dr.  Harris  ;  and  Unity  and 
scripturally  discussed  in  three  late  Schism,  and  also  in  Hind's  Rise  and 
treatises:    Schism,  by   Dr.  Hoppus;      Progr.  vol.  ii.  p.  40. 


LECT.  XX.]         UNION    IN   ONE    GOVERNMENT    NOT    ESSENTIAL. 


505 


the  interpretation  put  upon  that  portion  of  what  is  commonly 
called  the  apostles'  creed,  which  speaks  of  "  the  holy  catholic 
church"  —  by  the  most  ancient  of  the  fathers,  who  understood 
by  the  term  catholic,  nothing  more  nor  less,  as  Bishop  Pearson 
shows,  than  "  the  whole  or  universal  church."  It  is  equally 
contrary  to  the  interpretation  given  to  this  article  of  the  creed 
by  the  later  fathers,  as  this  same  learned  prelate  testifies ; 
for  they  meant  by  it  these  four  things :  First,  extension  to,  or 
universality,  as  embracing  all  men.  Secondly,  its  coinnmnication 
of  all  that  knowledge,  which  is  essential  to  salvation.  Thirdly, 
its  requirement  of  spiritual  obedience  from  all  classes  and  condi- 
tions of  men  —  and  fourthly,  the  fact  that  to  the  church  are  given 
all  graces,  whereby  all  the  diseases  of  the  soul  are  healed.^ 

And  not  only  so,  but  as  it  regards  the  creed  itself,  it  is  also 
an  unquestionable  fact,  that  this  part  of  the  article  was  not  found 
in  the  creed  at  all  for  some  ages  —  it  was  first  introduced  by  the 
Greek  —  "and  was  at  last  received  by  the  Latin  creed. "^  It  is 
just  as  contrary  to  scripture,  and  to  history,  to  allege  that  the 
fact  of  a  church  being  separate  in  its  ecclesiastical  relations  from 
another,  or  from  the  church  of  Rome,  or  the  Church  of  England, 
convicts  it  of  schism,  or  divides  it  from  the  communion  of  the 
church  of  Christ,  "  the  whole  body  in  heaven  and  on  earth."' 
On  the  contrary,  we  find  no  other  bonds  existing  between  the 
churches  mentioned  in  the  word  of  God,  than  union  in  truth  — 
union  in  spirit  —  union  in  love  —  and  in  good  works.  That 
neijihboring  churches  were  united  together  under  one  presby- 
terial  government  is,  we  think,  apparent  on  the  face  of  the  inspired 
record.     But  that  the  whole   christian  world  was   oriranized  in 


])  Pearson  on  the  Creed,  art.  ix. 
p.  520,  &c. 

"  VVlien  the  fathers  speak  of  the 
church,  they  mean  not  any  particular 
church,  but  the  whole  body  or  church 
of  christians,  though  divided  into 
many  nations  or  churches."  Leslie's 
Short  Method  with  the  Romanists,  p. 
18. 

"  Therefore,  the  archetypal  and  truly 
catholic  church  in  heaven,  is  that 
which  is  chiefly  and  principally  meant 
by  the  holy  catholic  church,  and  the 
communion  of  saints  in  the  creed. 
And  there  only  is  perfect  unity." 
Ibid,  p.  184. 

See  Jones  of  Nayland.  lect.  on  Heb. 
iii.  in  Wks.  vol.  iv.  p.  351,  &c. 

Archbishop  Sharp  thus  defines  the 
church,  (Serm  vol.  vii.  Oxf  Tr.  vol. 
iii.  p.  152,)  "  I  say  that  church  is  al- 
ways meant  of  the  whole  company  of 

64 


christians  dispersed  over  all  the  world , 
that  profess  the  common  faith,  (though 
perhaps  none  of  them  without  mixture 
of  error,)  and  enjoy  the  administration 
of  the  word  and  sacrament,  under 
their  lawful  pastors  and  governors  : 
all  these  people,  wherever  they  live, 
or  by  what  name  soever  they  call 
themselves,  make  up  together  that 
one  body  of  Christ  which  we  call  the 
catholic  church." 

2)  See  authorities  quoted  in  Pear- 
son on  the  Creed,  pp.  500,  513,  SlU. 

The  church  in  the  creed  refers  to 
the  invisible,  the  universal  church, 
and  not  to  any  particular  visible 
church. 

3)  Jackson's  Wks.  foi.  vol.  iii.  pp. 
821,  837,  and  877;  and  see  also  lect. 
xvii. 


506  UNION    IN    ONE    GOVERNMENT   NOT   ESSENTIAL.       [lECT.  XX. 

one  body,  or  considered  itself — though  one  in  doctrine,  in  spirit, 
in  aim,  and  in  hopes;  —  to  be  one  in  form,  and  order,  and 
polity,  and  government,  —  is  an  absurdity  too  gross  to  be  for  a 
moment  received.'  There  was  a  christian  confederacy  of  inde- 
pendent bodies,  but  no  consoHdated  union  under  one  govern- 
ment. 

We  find  Cyprian,  one  of  the  most  lordly  and  prelatic  of  the 
fathers,  —  and  who  could  fulminate  as  terribly  against  schism,  as 
any  modern  Jupiter  tonens,  in  unison  with  a  whole  council  of 
African  bishops,  laying  it  down  as  a  general  rule,  "  that  the 
people"  (even  without  the  authority  of  their  pastors)  who  are 
obedient  to  the  Lord's  commandments,  and  fear  God,  must  sep- 
arate from  a  sinful  bishop."^  Now  what  could  be  more  sinful 
than  the  usurpations  of  many  of  these  same  prelates.  **  Heret- 
ical bishops  were  usually,"  Archbishop  Potter  says,  "  deserted 
by  their  flocks."^  Irenajus  affirms,  "  that  we  ought  to  separate 
from  all  such,  and  to  adhere  to  those  who  faithfully  keep  the 
apostles'  doctrine."*  The  general  council  of  Constantinople  lays 
down  this  rule,  "  that  whoever  separates  from  such  as  publicly 
teach  heresy  in  the  church,  even  before  they  are  synodically 
condemned,  are  not  guilty  of  schism  ;  but  maintain  the  unity  of 
the  church  from  schisms  by  condemning,  not  a  bishop,  but  a  false 
bishop  and  a  false  teacher."  Such  also  were  the  views  of  the 
great  council  of  Ephesus.^  In  the  sixth  century,  nine  bishops 
in  the  north  of  Italy,  rejected  the  communion  of  the  Roman 
bishop,  as  an  heretic,  and  denied  that  thereby  they  lost  either 
communion  with  the  church  of  Christ,  or  valid  ordination.® 

But  there  is  no  necessity  for  any  further  enforcement  of  this 
position.  It  is  plain  that  there  were  seven  apostolic  churches  in 
Asia  Minor,  which  are  each  addressed  in  a  separate  epistle,  as 
independent  of  the  others.  It  is  also  granted  by  Burnet  and 
Faber,  that  Christ's  promises  are  not  confined  to  any  locality, 
and  therefore  not  to  any  particular  church,'  to  the  exclusion  of 

1)  See  Hind's  Rise  and  Progress  that  primitively  each  church  was  en- 
of  Christ,  vol.  ii.  Jackson's  Works,  dowed  with  a  perfect  liberty  and  full 
vol.  iii.  pp.  837  and  835,  and  King's  authority,  without  dependence  or  sub- 
Primitive  Christianity,  ch.  viii.  ordination    of  others,"    &c.,  he   goes 

2)  Cyprian  Epist.  p.  67.  on    to  say,  "  This    appeareth  by   the 

3)  Potter,  p.  160.  apostolical  writings  of  St.  Paul  and 

4)  Iren.  lib.  iv.  cap.  xliv.  St.  John  to  single  churches ;  wherein 

5)  Potter  on  Ch.  Govt.  p.  167.  they   are   supposed    able   to  exercise 

6)  Blair's  Waldenses,  vol.  i.  pp.  spiritual  power  for  establishing  decen- 
93, 97.  cy,    removing    disorders,    correcting 

7)  This  very  argument  we  find  offences,  deciding  causes,"  &c.  He 
employed  by  Dr.  Barrow,  in  his  Dis-  refers  to  Rev.  ii.  and  iii. ;  1  Cor.  xiv. 
course  on  the  Unity  of  the  Church,  40;  1  Thess.  v.  14 ;  1  Cor.  v.  12,  and 
which  we  had  not  seen  when   these  vi.  1. 

remarks  were  written.     After  stating 


LECT.  XX.]  UNION    IN    ONE    GOVERNMENT    NOT    ESSENTIAL.  507 

otliers.  Of  course  unity  cannot  be  determined  by  locality  or 
by  any  external  relations.'  It  is  liowever  sufficient  to  bring  the 
objection  to  the  force  of  an  argumenium  ad  absurdum,  in  order 
at  once  to  show  that  this  doctrine  being  true,  neither  the  Angli- 
can nor  the  Romish  church  can  sustain  any  pretensions  to  be 
true  churches  of  Christ.  For  on  this  scheme,  separation  from 
the  universal  church  is,  as  is  allowed,  destructive  to  the  church- 
standing  of  the  party  separating,  or  separated.  But  both  these 
churches  are  in  a  state  of  separation,  the  one  from  the  other, 
and  both  from  all  the  rest  of  the  christian  world.  They  are 
neither  of  them,  except,  in  the  most  empty  pretensions,  catholic 
in  the  sense  of  being  universal,  but  are  both  particular.  They 
neither  of  thein  have  any  claim  to  unity  either  in  doctrine  or  in 
polity; — but  are  divided  from  each  other,  and  among  them- 
selves.* On  their  OWN  principles,  therefore,  THEY  WOULD 
NEITHER  OF  THEM  BE  TRUE  CHURCHES  OF  JeSUS  ChRIST, 
AND     COULD     AFFORD     TO     THEIR     FOLLOWERS     NO     CERTAINTY 

WHATEVER  OF  SALVATION.^  That  the  successiou  and  commu- 
nion, and  unity  of  the  Romish  church  has  been  frequently  inter- 
rupted, so  as  to  leave  it,  according  to  the  prelatic  canons  of 
decision,  deformed  and  lifeless,  there  can  be  no  doubt.  And 
although  Dr.  Hook,  Mr.  Palmer,  and  others,  now  stake  the  for- 
tunes of  the  English  church  upon  the  fact  that  it  did  not  sep- 
arate FROM  THE  CHURCH  OF  RoxME,  yet  wc  are  bold  to  say 
this  assertion  can  never  be  maintained,  but  is  contrary  to  the 
most  abundant  evidence,  as  we  have  already  fully  shown.  But 
in  whatever  way  this  question  of  fact  may  be  determined,  we 
are  satisfied  with  the  assurance,  that  by  every  just  argument 
wherewith  the  arrogant  assumptions  of  the  Romish  church  are 
repelled  by  the  Anglican  hierarchy,  the  assumptions  of  both  can 
be  set  aside  by  ourselves.* 

But  there  is  another  ground  upon  which  we  may  confidently 
build  our  conclusion.  That  the  church  catholic  may  be  divided 
into  portions,  must  be  granted,  or  otherwise  the  succession  of  the 
prelacy  in  this  country  must  be  abandoned.  The  union  of  those 
different  churches  which  now  constitute,  by  their  adoption  of  the 

1)  Faber  on  Albigensea,  pp.  10,  fessor  Powell  saye,  (Tradition  Un- 
28,  and  25,  23.  veiled,  pp.  45  and  51,)  "  A  frame  of 

2)  On  the  various  sects  in  the  mind  which  seems  to  me,  in  one  sense, 
Romish  church,  see  Conder's  View  of  the  very  essence  of  superstition  ;  in 
All  Relisrions,  p.  6;  Palmer  on  the  another,  betrays,  to  say  the  least,  a 
Church,  vol.  i.  pp.  289,  290;  Edgar's  singular  accordance  with  rationalism 
Variations  of  Popery.  or  skepticism." 

3)  Speaking  of  the  uncertainty  4)  See  e.  g.  Palmer,  vol.  i.  pt.  i. 
in  which  this  system  rejoices,  Pro-  ch.  iv.  §  iii.  and  vol.  ii. 


508  UNION    IN    ONE    GOVEHNMENT    NOT    ESSENTIAL.       [lECT.  XX. 

same  government  and  discipline,  the  denomination  of  the  prelacy, 
underthe  title  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church:  this  union  was 
the  act  of  man,  and  all  its  regulations  tiie  result  of  man's  wisdom. 
The  revolution,  by  severing  the  union  between  the  colonial  and 
the  English  churches,  destroyed  "  tiie  only  bond  of  union  they 
(i.  e.  the  colonial  churches)  ever  had  ;  viz.  the  common,  ru- 
lers, and  the  sacred  laws."'  "  Their  union  was  absolutely  de- 
stroyed." "  Testimony  would  seem  to  leave  no  doubt"  of  the 
fact,  "  that  in  each  slate  the  church  considered  itself  an  integral 
part  of  the  church  of  Christ,  perfectly  independent  in  its  govern- 
ment of  any  and  every  branch  of  the  church  in  Christendom."" 
This  fact  Dr.  Hawks,  in  his  view  of  the  constitution  of  that 
church,  fully  confirms  by  an  outline  of  the  history  of  the  rise, 
progress,  and  maturity  of  its  present  organization.  The  church, 
as  it  existed  in  each  state,  formally  entered  into  this  compact  by 
its  delegated  representatives.  They  came  together  "  as  inde- 
pendent churches  duly  organized,  and  so  considered  each  other." 
Thus  we  are  informed,  tliat  "early  in  1785,  the  clergy  of  South 
Carolina  met,  and  agreed  to  send  delegates  to  the  next  general 
meeting,  but  in  complying  with  the  invitation  to  cooperate  in  the 
measures  necessary  to  effect  a  general  union,  they  accompanied 
their  compliance  with  an  unequivocal  proof  of  their  sense  of  the 
independence  of  the  South  Carolina  church,  for  ihey  annexed  to 
it  an  understanding  that  no  bishop  was  to  be  settled  in  that  stale." 

A  general  constitution,  after  having  undergone  much  and  re- 
peated discussion,  was  "finally  adopted  on  the  8th  of  August, 
1789,  and  became  the  fundamental  law  of  the  protestant  episco- 
pal church  in  the  United  States.  The  work  commenced  at  the 
first  general  meeting  of  episco[)alians  in  October,  1784,  was  thus 
consummated  in  August  1789,  and  during  the  intervening  period 
there  was  no  bond  holding  the  churches  on  this  continent  to- 
gether, but  the  bond  of  a  common  faith." 

If,  therefore,  UNiONMuider  one  government  and  discipline,  and 
the  actual  presence  and  enjoyment  of  the  e))iscopate  is  essential 
lo  the  being  of  a  true   church,  certain  it  is,  that  before  1789, 

THERE   WAS     NO    SUCH   THING  AS    A    PHELATIC   CHURCH    IN   THIS 

COUNTRY,  NOR  IN  THIS  STATE  ;  but  Only  a  number  of  separate 
and  entirely  in<lcpendent  communities.  And  since  the  present 
union  of  these  communions  under  one  general  government  is  the 
result  of  human  action,  mutual  consultation,  and  voluntary  com- 
pact, so  that  while  these  several  communions,  under  this  consti- 

1)  Dr.  Hawks's  Constit.  of  Prot.  a  union  of  all  the  episcopal  churches 
Ep.  Ch.  in  Ch.  Record.  in  the  United  States,  into  one  body  or 

2)  Tiie  great  object  he,  Bishop  church  only."      Dr.   Wilson's  Mem. 
White, "  contemplated,  was  to  procure  p.  97. 


LECT.  XX.]  EPISCOPALIANS    SHOULD    BE    VERY    MODEST. 


509 


tution,  surrendered  certain  riijbts  previously  enjoyed,  they  re- 
tained others  which  they  still  possess.  Episcoj^alians,  surely, 
ought  to  he,  in  all  modesty,  the  last  among  all  ilie  churches  in 
this  country,  to  boast  either  of  antiquity,  succession,  divine  right, 
or  the  absolute  necessity  of  a  perfect  union  of  all  christian  com- 
munions, in  order  to  a  perfect  christian  unity  in  the  same  com- 
mon faith.' 


1)  It  is  well  known  that  the  ques- 
tion of  the  introduction  of  an  Ameri- 
can episcopate,  created  one  of  the 
most  lengthened  and  bitter  contro- 
versies which  has  been  carried  on  in 
this  country  ;  and  that  its  introduction 
was  equally  and  strenuously  opposed 
both  within  and  without  the  episcopal 
chur.'hes.  On  this  subject  we  add  the 
foUowinfT  references,  from  which  may 
be  gathered  the  views  entertained  of 
prelacy  by  our  ancestors. 

See  a  Letter  to  a  Friend,  containing 
Remarks  on  certain  passages  of  a 
Sermon,  by  the  Bishop  of  Landaff,  by 
Charles  Chauucy,  D.  D.  Boston,  17C7, 
pp.  56. 

A  Letter  to  the  Right  Rev.  John 
Lord,  Bishop  of  Landaff,  by  William 
Livingston,  N.  York,  I7(jd,  pp.  2b. 

A  Letter  to  Dr.  Bradbury  Chandler, 
concerning  an  American  Bishop, 
printed  A.  D.  1768. 

An  Address  from  the  Clergy  of  N. 
York  and  N.  Jersey  to  the  Episcopa- 
lians in  Virginia,  occasioned  by  some 
late  transactions  in  that  Colony  rela- 
tive to  an  American  Episcopate,  New 
York,  1771,  pp.  58.  From  this  it  ap- 
pears, (p.  5,)  that  "  some  who  call 
themselves,  and  more  especially  some 
of  their  clergy,  publicly  and  formally 
protested  against  such  an  application  ; 
and  most  of  all,  that  thev  have  en- 
deavored to  vindicate  this  proceeding 
in   terms  which   pl.mnly  show   that 

they  HAVE  I.ITTLK,  IF  AN  V,  REVKRENCE 
FOR  THE   EPISCOPAL  ORDER."'       "  Most 

of  the  members  of  the  house  of  Bur- 
gesses, in  Virginia,  are  professed 
episcopalians,  that  is,  in  the  lowest 
sense  of  the  word,  friends  to  bishops. 
And  yet  these  professed  friends  to 
bishops,  have  declared  their  abhor- 
rence of  them,  unless  at  the  distance 
of  three  thousand  miles;  calling  the 
plan  for  introducing  them  in  the  most 
unexceptionable  form,  on  this  side  of 
the  Atlantic,  a  pernicious  project." 
pp.  6,  7. 


This  controversy  commenced  in 
1672,  when  a  resolution  was  taken  by 
the  king  in  council  to  send  a  bishop 
to  Virginia. 

See  the  American  Whig,  being  a 
collection  of  tracts  on  the  subject  of 
the  residence  of  protestant  bishops  in 
the  American  colonies,  New  York, 
1768,  2  vols. 

See  especially  Dr.  Chauncy's  Re- 
marks on  Ur.  Chandler's  arguments, 
wherein  the  reasons  for  an  American 
episcopate  are  shown  to  be  insufficient, 
and  the  objections  against  it  in  full 
force.  Boston,  1768,  in  Sprague's 
Coll.  vol.  417. 

That  this  opposition  to  the  intro- 
duction of  the  episcopate  into  Ameri- 
ca, arose  from  "the  dread  of  encroach- 
ments on  tlie  liberties  of  our  citizens," 
is  admitted  by  Bishop  White,  in 
"  The  Fast  and  the  Future,"  being  his 
episcopal  charge,  published  in  Philad. 
1834,  (pp.  5  and  7,)  where  he  states 
tliat  "  there  was  strong  repugnancy 
aiiainst  it  in  certain  respectable  mem- 
bers of  our  ministry." 

See  full  on,  in  Dr.  Hodge's  Constit. 
Hist.  Presb.  Ch.  part  ii.  p.  441),  &c. 
How  generally  opposed,  p.  454. 

The  preamble  to  the  act  b}'  which 
the  American  bishops.  Provost  and 
White,  were  consecrated  in  England, 
shows  how  completely  the  election 
and  consecration  of  English  bishops 
are  under  the  control  of  the  crown. 
The  preamble  begins  thus  :  "  Where- 
as, by  the  laws  of  this  realm,  no  per- 
son can  be  consecrated  to  the  office  of 
a  bishop,  icitltout  the  king's  license 
for  his  election  to  that  office,  and  the 
royal  mandate  under  the  great  seal 
for  his  confirmation  and  consecration, 
«&.c."  So  that  the  American  episco- 
pate is  not  less  honored  than  the  Eng- 
lish, by  tracing  itself  up  in  a  direct 
descent  to  the  kings  and  queens  of 
England,  to  whose  royal  supremacy 
it  owes  its  existence  ! 


ADDITIONAL   NOTES  TO   LECTURE  TWENTIETH. 


NOTE   A. 


THE    NATURE    OF    ORDINATION. 

We  had  desijrned  here  lo  give  very  full  illustrations  of  the  sentiments  of 
the  reformers  and  later  divines  on  this  subject.  We  have  only  room  for  a 
portion  of  our  evidence.  WicklifFe  did  not  believe  in  the  necessity  of  impo- 
sition of  hands.  Accordinfj  lo  Spalatinensis,  a  multitude  of  theologians  have 
believed  that  imposition  of  hands  is  not  essential  to  ordination.  (De  Rep. 
Eccl.  1.  2,  0.  4,  Numb.  19,  in  Altare  Damascenum,  p.  174.)  "  At  the  famous 
conference  at  Poisstj,"  (Tiie  Rights  of  the  Chr.  Ch.  Lond.,  1707,  pp.  335  and 
336,)  "  between  papists  and  protestants,  when  want  of  a  call  and  authority  was 
objected  to  the  reformed  ministers,  Beza  declares  "  that  to  a  legitimate  call, 
imposition  of  hands  was  not  necessary  ;  but  that  the  chief  and  substantial  to- 
kens thereof  were  a  good  life,  sound  doctrine,  and  election,  (meaning  of  the 
people,)  nor  was  it  to  be  wondered  at,  if  they  had  not  received  imposition  of 
hands  from  them,  v/hose  corrupt  life,  superstition,  and  false  doctrine  they 
were  to  reprove.  Or  how  could  it  be  expected  they  should  ever  be  allowed 
of  by  them,  who  were  enemies  to  the  truth  they  defended.  And  after  the 
same  manner  does  the  excellent  Monsieur  Claude,  and  other  Huguenot  divines 
write." 

"  The  reformed  clergy  had  no  notion  that  the  ministers  of  Christ  must  re- 
ceive their  power  and  authority  from  antichrist;  or  that  his  holy  church 
could  not  subsist  otherwise  than  by  virtue  of  a  power  derived  from  the  man 
of  sin,  the  son  of  perdition,  who  had  been  so  frequently  drunk  with  the  blood 
of  the  saints.  They  thought  that  owning  a  character  to  be  given  tliem  by  the 
Beast,  who  pretended  to  give  an  indelible  one,  was  too  much  like  receiving 
his  mark:  and  therefore  that  great  apostle,  Luther,  proud  of  being  degraded 
by  the  Romish  church,  absolutely  disavows  and  disclaims  all  popish  ordina- 
tions, and  in  his  Treatise  of  the  Ministry  declares  one  ought  to  suffer  any  thing 
rather  than  be  ordained  by  papists." 

Dr.  McCrie  speaks  of  imposition  of  hands  (Life  of  Knox,  vol.  i.  p.  55) 
&c.  as  "  certain  external  formalities  which  had  been  usual  in  the  church,  or 
which,  in  ordinary  ca.'ses,  may  be  observed  with  ])ropriety  in  the  installation 
of  persons  into  sacred  offices.  These,  as  far  as  warranted  by  scripture,  or 
conducive  to  the  preservation  of  order,  he  (Knox)  did  not  contemn;  and  his  judg- 
ment respecting  them  may  be  learned  from  the  early  practice  of  the  Scottish 
reformed  church,  in  the  organization  of  which  he  had  so  active  a  share.  In 
common  with  all  the  original  reformers,  he  rejected  the  necessity  of  episcopal 
ordination,  as  totally  unauthorized  by  the  laws  of  Christ ;  nor  did  he  even 
reffard  the  imposition  of  the  hands  of  presbyters  as  a  rite  essential  to  the  va- 
lidity of  orders,  or  of  necessary  observance  in  all  circumstances  of  the 
church." 

"  But,"  says  Dr.  Mitchell,  (Presb.  Letters,  p.  220,)  "not  only  has  imposition 
of  hands  been  frequently  dispensed  with  in  practice  :  the  doctrine  of  its  in- 
dispensable necessity  has  not  been  the  constant  doctrine  of  the  church.  We 
learn  from  Fra  Paolo,  in  his  History  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  that  Gregory  IX. 


NOTES   TO    LECTDRE    XX.  511 

calls  imposition  of  hands  a  rite  *  brouglit  in,'  in  other  words,  'a  rite  added 
to  those  institutions,  whicli  have  tlie  sanction  of  divine  prescription  :  '  and  he 
mentions,  that  the  famous  canonists.  Hortiensis,  Joannes,  Andreas,  Abbas, 
and  others,  affirm  that  the  pope  may  ordain  a  priest  with  these  words,  '  be 
thou  a  priest.'  He  quotes  also  Innocent  IV.  the  father  of  the  canon  law,,  and 
the  best  civilian  of  his  age,  as  teaching,  that,  if  the  forms  had  not  been  in- 
vented, it  had  been  sufficient  if  the  ordainer  had  said,  '  be  thou  a  priest,'  or 
some  other  words  of  the  '  like  import.'  Fra  Paolo  opposes  this  doctrine, 
and  I  do  not  defend  it.  But  it  was  at  one  period,  the  doctrine  of  the 
most  learned  canonists.  And  that  the  jtracticc  of  the  western  church  was 
suitable  to  it,  while  it  was  in  vogue,  is  as  probable,  as  that  it  was  acted  upon, 
in  the  middle  of  the  third  century,  by  such  ecclesiastics  as  Phedimus,  and 
Gregory  of  Neocesarea." 

"  The  imposition  of  hands,"  says  Selden,  "  upon  the  minister,  when  all 
is  done,  will  be  nothing  but  a  designation  of  a  person  to  this  or  that  office  in 
the  church  'Tis  a  ridiculous  phrase  that  of  the  canonists,  coriferre  ordines. 
'Tis  cooptare  aliquem  in  oidinem,  to  make  a  man  one  of  us,  one  of  our 
number,  one  of  our  order." 

Dr.  Chauncy,  (p.  49,)  in  his  Dudleian  lecture,  also  defines  it  thus:  "  This, 
the  Dr.  had  told  him  was  the  design  of  ordination.  Not  for  the  ordainers, 
properly  speaking,  to  authorize  and  impower  them  themselves,  but  to  declare 
who  tlie  persons  were  that  Christ's  commission  had  impowered."  Not  to 
■make them  offircrs,  as  Mr.  L.  would  have  it:  but  "  to  give  them  an  authentic 
character,  as  such,  in  the  eye  of  the  world." 

As  to  the  virtue  attributed  to  the  mere  form  of  imposition  of  hands,  there 
is  no  foundation  for  it  in  the  word  of  God.  The  following  remarks  of  the  Rev. 
Mr.  Gordon,  (Inq.  into  the  powers  of  Ecclesiastees,  Edinb.  180S,)  are  conclusive. 
Of  the  deacons  appointed  by  the  apostles  he  s.ays  :  "  These  public  trustees  did  not 
receive  their  qualification  from  their  ordination,  nor  one  virtue  of  which  they 
were  not  formerly  possessed ;  but  contrary-wise,  they  were  appointed  to  this 
work,  as  being  men  of  honest  report,  full  of  the  H0I3'  Ghost,  and  of  wisdom. 
Their  ordination,  therefore,  is  to  be  considered  only  as  a  public  and  solemn 
declaration  of  their  election.  Nor  doth  it  appear  that  the  twelve  ordained 
more  in  this  or  any  other  capacity.  Their  general  commission  included  in  it, 
no  doubt,  every  measure  necessary  for  the  progress  of  Christianity,  and  the 
edification  of  the  churches.  But  what  particular  pastors  they  appointed,  or 
with  regard  to  what  churches,  we  are  entirely  in  the  dark.  The  sacred  wri- 
ters furnish  us  with  nothing  on  this  subject." 

So  after  examining  other  cases,  he  says,  (p.  23,  24,  2.5.)  "  From  all  these  it 
may  be  allowed  that  laying  on  of  hands  was  a  rite  commonly  used  in  ordain- 
ing to  the  ministerial  office.  But  it  ought  here  carefully  to  be  observed, 
that  there  is  nothing  in  this  that  renders  it  a  rite  peculiar  to  ministerial  ap- 
pointment. For  it  is  affirmed  that  extraordinary  gifts  were  conferred  tcithout 
this  rite,  and  that  they  were  communicated  by  it,  not  merely  to  the  first  min- 
isters of  religion,  but  to  christians  in  general.  Now,  if  extraordinary  and  mi- 
raculous powers  were  not  confined  to  it,  if  this  rite  was  commonly  used  in 
conferring  these  extraordinary  powers  on  christians  in  general,  I  desire  to 
know  in  what  respect  it  can  possibly  be  considered  as  characteristic  of  the 
ministerial  office  'i  " 

"  What  we  have  here  affirmed,  and  which,  we  apprehend,  will  serve  to  throw 
very  considerable  light  upon  this  question,  we  shall  now  proceed  to  prove  from 
the  mostdecisive  evidence.  First,  extraordinary  gifts  were  communicated  with- 
out imposition  of  hands.  '  Then  Peter  said  unto  them,  repent  and  be  bap- 
tized in  the  name  of  Christ  Jesus  for  the  remission  of  sins,  and  ye  shall  re- 
ceive the  Holy  Ghost —  while  Peter  yet  spake  the.-!C  words,  the  Holy  Ghost 
fell  on  all  them  that  heard  the  word  ;  and  they  who  believed  were  astonished, 
for  they  heard  them  speak  with  tongues,  and  magnify  God.'  Secondhj,  ex- 
traordinary gifts  were  communicated  to  christians  in  general  by  imposition  of 
hands.  '  Now,  when  the  apostles  had  heard  that  Samaria  had  received  the 
word  of  God,  they  sent  unto  them  Peter  and  John,  who,  when  they  were 
come,  prayed  that  they  might  receive  the  Holy  Ghost,  for  as  yet  he  had  fallen 


512  NOTES    TO     LECTURE    XX. 

upon  none  of  thein  :  only  they  believed  on  the  Lord  Jesus;  then  laid  they 
their  hands  upon  them,  and  they  received  tiie  Holy  Ghost."  "  Supposing 
further,  that  all  whi)  were  ordained  to  the  ministerial  office,  were  ordained  by 
imposition  of  hands  :  Neillier  is  there  anything  characterisllc  here;  since 
it  will  admit  of  no  doubt,  that  this  was  a  form  used  in  communicating  gifts  of 
the  Holv  Ghost  on  many  other  occasions.  We  may,  therefore,  conclude,  that 
there  is  not  the  least  evidence  in  all  the  apostolic  writings,  that  ordination, 
as  implying  the  communication  of  certain  spiritual  gifts  by  imposition  of 
hands,  was  a  rite  appropriated  to  the  pastoral  office,  intended  to  render  its 
ministrations  valid,  and  to  distinguish  ecclesiastic  officers  from  the  body  of 
christians  by  certain  invisible  powers." 

So  in  replying  to  objections,  he  Tidds,  (p.  29,)  "  In  theirs'  place,  this  objec- 
tion croes  entirely  upon  a  mistake  of  the  author's  argument.  He  is  not  rea- 
soning against  this  or  that  form  of  designation  to  ihe  ministerial  function. 
His  reasoning  is  entirely  levelled  against  this  form  as  necessary  and  essential 
in  itself;  as  necessary  to  constitute  the  ministerial  character,  as  essential  to 
the  validity  of  ministerial  acts  ;  and,  in  this  view,  the  whole  of  his  argument 
points  against  the  connexion  between  laying  on  of  hands,  and  certain  spir- 
itual powers,  supposed  to  be  communicated  by  this  external  rite.  Dissolve 
this  connexion,  in  which  the  whole  fascination  of  priestcraft  lies,  and  he  ac- 
knowledires,  that  imposition  of  hands  is  a  very  innocent  ceremony." 

See  also  Campbells  Lect.  on  Eccl.  Hist.,  Lect.  xi.  pp.  192,  194,  199,  208. 
Dr.  Rice  in  Evang.  and  Lit.  Mag.,  vol.  x.  p.  92,  &c. 


NOTE  B. 

That  in  many  cases  separation  from  all  connexion  with  other  churches  is 
necessary,  and  that  in  itself  considered,  separation  is  a  different  and  distinct 
tliinir  from  scliism,  might,  had  we  room,  be  abundantly  shown  from  the  opin- 
ions of  many  ol  the  ablest  writers.     We  add  some  references. 

That  mere  separation  will  not  infer  schism,  even  Romanists  must  admit, 
(Palmer,  vol.  ii.  [).  532.)  "  Who,"  says  Dupin,  "  would  dare  to  say  that  Atha- 
nasius  and  the  rest  were  schismatics,  and  the  Arians  in  the  church,  because 
Liberius  admitted  the  latter  to  his  communion,  and  rejected  the  former i"" 
(See  vol.  i.  p.  222 ) 

Delahogue  also  says  that  "  during  forty  years,  (do.  do.)  of  the  great  western 
schism,  various  competitors  for  the  pontificate  had  their  respective  obediences; 
and  each  of  them  excommutncated  those  which  did  not  adhere  to  them.  But 
we  have  proved  that  none  of  those  obediences  were  schismatical.  Hence  it 
is  plain  that  Romanists  cannot  affix  the  charge  of  schism  on  any  church  mere- 
ly from  the  iart  of  its  not  being  in  the  Roman  communion."  (Delahogue, 
De  Eccl    Christi,  p.  393.) 

The  Reverend  Mr.  H;iles,  of  Eaton,  in  his  Sermon  on  Christ's  Kingdom  not 
of  this  World,  says  "  After  the  revolt  of  Jeroboam  and  the  ten  tribes  from  the 
house  of  David,  tliere  were  many  devout  and  religious  persons  in  Israel,  and 
yet  we  find  not  that  they  used  the  outward  form  of  worsliip  which  was  com- 
manded. Elias  and  Elisha,  two  great  prophets  in  Israel,  did  they  ever  go  up 
to  Jerusalem  to  worship?  Obadiah,  a  great  courtier  in  King  Ahab's  court, 
and  one  that  feared  the  Lord  exceedingly  ;  the  seven  thousands  which  bowed 
not  their  knees  to  Baal  when  they  came  up  to  the  temple  to  offi;r .'  a  thing 
which  doubtless  they  would  have  done,  if  they  had  underdtood  the  command- 
ment of  God  in  that  behalf  to  have  been  absolute." 

See  the  question  of  separation  fully  discussed  and  the  reformers  vindicated, 
in  Turretini  Opera,  tom.  iv,  "  De  Necessaria  Secessione  nostra  ab.  Eccl.  Rom." 
&c.,  and  in  "V^oetius  passim. 

A  division  of  external  communion  does  not  necessarily  imply  schism. 
Palmer  on  the  Ch.  vol.  i.  pp.  73  and  84. 

This  is  also  allowed  by  Daille.  as  quoted  by  Slillingfleet  in  his  Unreasona- 
bleness of  Separation.  See  in  Owen's  Wks.  vol.  xx,  p.  281  ;  also  by  Stilling- 
fleet  himself  in  do.  as  quoted  in  do.  p.  281.  See  this  point  largely  argued  in 
Dr.  Slillingfleet's  Irenic.  part  i.  ch.  iv.  see  pp.  115,  116,  124.     Green  in  his 


NOTES   TO   LECTDRE   XX.  513 

Unreasonableness  of  Separation,  this  author  lays  down  three  allowable  causes 
of  separation;  1,  idolatrous  worship;  2,  false  doctrine;  and  3,  the  niakimr  of 
things  indifferent  necessary  to  salvation.  See  Owen's  Answer  to,  in  Wks.  vol. 
XX,  p.  313.  Bingham  shows  it  to  be  the  sense  of  antiquity  that  no  communion 
was  to  be  held  with  a  simoniacal  bishop  or  with  an  intruder  into  another's 
diocese,  nor  with  one  who  had  fallen  into  heresy  or  idolatry,  (Antiq.  b.  16,  ch. 
i.  vol.  vi.  p.  31.) 

See  other  illustrations,  as  given  by  Dr.  Claggett,  in  Notes  of  the  Ch.  Ex'd 
and  Ref  d,  p.  177  and  178,  185,  109,  and  Bishop  Hall,  in  Works,  vol.  ix.  p.  388. 
See,  also,  Faber's  Vallenses  and  Albigenses,  p.  24;  Jackson's  Works,  fol. 
vol.  iii.  pp.  818,  837,  85,  and  Oxf  Tr.,  vol.  i.  pp.  92, 93  ;  Palmer  on  the  Ch.,  vol. 
i.,  p.  32,  and  p.  51  and  78,  207,  79—89  ;  Clarkson's  Prim.  Episcop.  p.  221,  &c.; 
Anct.  Christ.,  vol.  i.  p.  379  ;  Schism,  pp.  275,  292,  277,  with  authorities ;  Cor- 
bet on  the  Church,  in  Remains,  Lond.,  1684,  pp.  22 — 24  ;  Jackson's  Works, fol. 
vol.  iii.,  pp.  8.34,837;  Van  Mildert's  Boyle  Lectures,  vol.  i.,  p.  285. 

Owen  constantly  argues  on  this  supposition.  See  especially  his  treatises  on 
schism,  in  vol.  xix.  and  xx. ;  also,  Blair's  Wald.,  vol.  i.,  pp.  90, 93,  97 ;  Vidal's 
Mosheim,  vol.  i.,  pp.  116,  «&c. 

The  true  church  at  Jerusalem,  under  Hadrian,  seceded  from  the  remaining 
church.     See  Vidal's  Mosheim,  vol.  ii.,  p.  94. 

Separation  is  justifiable  when  unchristian  terms  of  communion  are  required. 
See  Heber,  in  life  of  Taylor,  Works  of,  vol.  i.,  p.  184  ;  see  Matthew  Henry's 
able  Discourse  on  "  Separation  without  Rebellion,"  in  Works,  Lond.,  1830,  p. 
1137  and  1142. 

Hence  are  the  Puritans  to  be  justified  in  their  separation.  "  The  only  alter- 
native (do.  p.  202;  see  also  p.  197)  was  submission  to  what  they  deemed 
unscriptural  and  pernicious.  Hence  the  absurdity  of  the  charge  of  schism, 
which  has  been  so  liberally  preferred  by  the  advocates  of  the  church.  It  mat- 
ters not,  so  far  as  this  charge  is  concerned,  whether  the  principles  of  the  sep- 
aratists were  erroneous  or  true.  They  were  bound  to  act  upon  them,  and  the 
attempt  to  prevent  their  doing  so  by  deprivation  and  imprisonment  constitutes 
the  only  schism  of  the  case.  The  charge  lies  against  the  rulers  of  the  chuich, 
and  not  against  those  who  seceded  from  her.  The  former,  by  their  tyrannical 
impositions,  destro3'ed  the  unity  of  the  church;  while  the  latter,  by  refusing 
to  submit  to  their  pleasure,  only  performed  an  act  of  loyalty  to  Christ." 

"  In  short,  it  is  perfectly  childish,"  says  Dr.  Price,  (Hist  of  Prot.  Non-conf., 
j.,  202,)  "  to  confound  separation  and  schism.  The  former  may  not  only  be 
guiltless,  but  be  eminently  praiseworthy  ;  while  the  latter  is  invariably  crim- 
inal in  its  origin,  and  pernicious  in  its  fruits."  So,  also,  the  Rev.  Thomas  Bin- 
ney,  (Dissent  not  Schism,  in  do.  203,  Note,)  "  Schism,  in  fact,  is  a  thing  bad 
in  itself;  bad  in  its  very  nature  :  separation  may  be  good  or  bad,  according  to 
circumstances.  A  schismatic  is  an  epithet  of  criminality  ;  it  indicates  the  per- 
sonal character  of  the  individual,  and  it  describes  that  character  as  bad.  A 
separatist  is  merely  a  name  of  circumstance  ;  in  itself  it  is  neither  bad  nor 
good  ;  it  indicates  nothing  as  to  the  personal  character  of  the  individual,  —  it 
merely  describes  his  position  in  relation  to  others.  Schism  can  exist,  as  we 
have  seen,  where  there  is  no  separation,  and  separation  itself  is  not  necessarily 
schism ;  not  necessarily  so,  for,  while  it  may  be  occasioned  by  crime,  it  may 
be  occasioned  by  virtue  ;  it  may  result,  in  those  who  depart  from  intolerance 
attempted,  or  intolerance  sustained,  from  the  pride  of  faction,  or  the  predomi- 
nance of  principle  ;  attachment  to  party,  or  attachment  to  truth.  A  schismatic, 
in  short,  must  be  a  sinner,  on  whichever  side  he  stands;  a  separatist  may  be 
more  sinned  against  than  sinning."  This  distinction  is  clearly  maintained  by 
Chillingworth,  and  other  protestant  writers,  in  their  controversy  with  the  Ro- 
manists ;  and  the  principles  which  they  so  triumphantly  advocated  in  behalf 
of  protestantism,  are  equally  applicable  to  the  case  before  us.  "  Not  protes- 
tants  for  rejecting,"  says  Chillingworth,  "  but  the  church  of  Rome  for  impo- 
sing upon  the  faith  of  christians,  doctrines  unwritten  and  unnecessary,  and  for 
disturbing  the  church's  peace,  and  dividing  amity  for  such  matters,  is,  in  a  high 
degree,  presumptuous  and  schismatical. 

65 


LECTURE    XXI. 


THE    TRUE    DOCTRINE    OF    APOSTOLICAL    SUCCESSION     ASSERTED. 
THE     SUBJECT     CONCLUDED. 

Having  exhibited  the  weakness  of  the  prelatic  doctrine  of 
apostolical  succession,  when  brought  to  the  test  of  scripture, 
reason,  history,  or  the  judgment  of  some  of  the  greatest  divines  ; 
our  present  object  is  to  ascertain  wherein  consists  the  essence  of 
a  true  church.  Our  first  inquiry  was,  what  is  essential  to  the 
being  of  a  true  church,  generally  considered  ?  And  this  we 
found  to  be  sound  christian  doctrine,  —  a  lawful  ministry  —  and 
the  due  administration  of  gospel  ordinances.  We  were  thus  led 
to  inquire,  what  is  essential  to  the  being  of  the  church  as  it 
regards  its  ministers?  The  characteristics  of  a  true  minister,  as 
given  in  the  divine  word,  are  holiness  of  life,  the  call  of  God, 
and  soundness  of  doctrine.  This  call  of  God,  which  alone  can 
qualify  for  the  office  of  the  ministry,  and  of  which  ordination 
is  no  more  than  the  outward  and  solemn  recognition,  is  evidenc- 
ed by  the  possession  of  those  qualifications  necessary  for  this 
office,  and  by  an  earnest  desire,  wrought  within  the  soul,  to 
serve  God  in  the  gospel  of  his  Son.  This  divine  call  is  ratified 
ecclesiastically,  when  the  individual  professing  it  has  been 
received,  approved,  and  admitted  into  that  office,  in  the  hope 
and  belief  that  he  has  been  divinely  called,  by  those  to  whom 
such  authority  is  given  in  each  particular  denomination.  But 
the  entire  authority  of  the  ministry  proceeds  originally  and  essen- 
tially from  the  commission  of  its  divine  Head,  and  not  from  any 
earthly  tribunal  j  and  the  personal  fitness  for  it  springs  from  this 


516  UNIFORMITY    IN   RITES    NOT   ESSENTIAL.  [lECT.  XXI. 

inward  and  divine  call,  to  which  man  can  add  nothing  but  the 
sanction  of  ecclesiastical  order,  and  solemn  attestation. 

We  then  proceeded  to  show,  in  the  second  place,  what  is  not 
essential  to  the  being  of  a  church  ;  when  we  endeavored  to 
demonstrate  that  union  under  one  ecclesiastical  government  is 
not  essential.  There  were  in  the  beginning  —  there  have  been 
in  every  age  —  there  are  now — and  there  ever  shall  be  —  true 
and  pure  churches  of  Christ,  which  are  constituent  portions  of  the 
holy,  catholic,  and  apostolic  church,  who  owned,  do  own,  and 
shall  own,  no  subjection  to  any  one  supreme  governing  power. 
The  mere  fact  of  separation  or  independence,  does  not  therefore 
invalidate  the  claims  of  any  society  to  the  denomination  of  a 
true  church,  or  otherwise,  there  is  no  such  thing  as  a  true  church 
on  earth. 

2.  We  will  now,  therefore,  proceed  to  show,  that  uniformity  in 
rites,  ceremonies,  or  polity,  is  not  essential  to  the  constitution 
of  a  true  church,  nor  to  the  scriptural  unity  of  the  church  gen- 
erally. 

The  word  of  God  solemnly  forbids  any  severance  of  the 
bonds  of  christian  union,  on  account  of  diversities  of  views 
respecting  rites  and  ceremonies.  In  some  cases  there  appears 
unquestionably  to  have  existed  such  differences  in  apostolical 
churches,  as  in  those  of  Rome  and  Corinth,  and  yet  they  are 
required  to  receive  one  another  as  Christ  had  received  them. 
This  duty  of  mutual  tolerance  —  this  liberty  which  is  the  privi- 
lege of  every  christian,  the  apostle  Paul  proclaims  and  enforces 
at  length,  in  the  fourteenth  chapter  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
Romans,  in  his  Epistles  to  the  Corinthians,  and  indeed  through- 
out all  his  writings.  "  Let  no  man  judge  you,"  says  he,  "  in 
meat  or  in  drink,  or  in  respect  of  an  holyday,  or  of  the  new 
moon,  or  of  the  Sabbath  days.  If  ye  be  dead  with  Christ  from 
the  rudiments  of  the  world,  why,  as  the  living  in  the  world,  are 
ye  subject  to  ordinances,  after  the  doctrines  and  commandments 
of  men?  "^ 

1)  See  Schism,  chap.  viii.  and  pt.  ters  connected  with   true  godliness, 

ii.  eh   ii.  p.  326,  &c.    "  In  the  days  of  than  any   two   evangelical  churches 

the  apostles,  there   were  great  errors  differ  in  this  country."     Dr.  Rice's 

and    disorders    in    many     particular  Magazine,    (The     Lit.    and    Evang. 

churches  organized  by  them Mag.)  vol.  ix.   1826,  p.   195.     Essays 

But  there  was  no  breach  of  commun-  on  the  Church.  "  The  standard  adopt- 
ion in  the  universal  church.  There  ed  by  the  presbyterian  church  does 
was  a  general  acknowledgment  of  not  own  apostolical  dignity  in  any 
brotherhood,  and  a  communication  officer  now  in  the  universal  church, 
both  of  spiritual  and  temporal  bene-  It  is  not  thought  that  the  form  of  ad- 
fits.  It  is  not  a  rash  conjecture,  that  ministration  is  essential  to  the  being 
the  church  at  Corinth  differed  more  of  a  church."  (Ibid,  p.  132.) 
from  the  church  at  Philippi,  in  mat- 


LECT,  XXI.]         UNIFORMITY    IN   RITES    NOT   ESSENTIAL.  517 

There  were  at  a  very  early  period  different  congregations  in 
the  same  city,  as  in  Jerusalem,  Corinth,  Antioch,  he.  and  yet 
these  were  one.  So  were  there  different  churches  in  different 
parts  of  the  same  country,  and  yet  these  were  one.  And  so 
again  were  there  churches  in  different  countries,  and  yet  were 
these  one.  It  is  also  certain  that  these  churches  differed  from 
each  other  in  various  points,  and  yet  they  remained  one.  Thus 
where  there  were  both  Jewish  and  Gentile  converts  in  the  same 
community,  they  either  retained  their  different  views,  rites,  and 
customs,  (as  it  is  known  the  Hebrew  christians  did  theirs  for  a 
length  of  time,)  while  united  in  the  same  congregation,  or  they 
formed  separate  congregations,  where  each  maintained  their  own 
customs ;  and  yet  did  they  preserve  the  bonds  of  peace  and 
unity.' 

"  It  can  be  indisputably  proved,"  says  the  learned  Mosheim,  in 
his  Commentaries,  "  that  those  of  the  christians  who  persisted 
in  adhering  to  the  observance  of  the  law  of  Moses,  did  not  sep- 
arate themselves  from  the  rest  of  the  brethren,  until  Jerusalem, 
which  had  just  begun  to  rise  again  from  its  ashes,  was  secondly,  and 
finally,  laid  waste  by  the  Romans,  in  the  time  of  the  Emperor  Ha- 
drian ;  and  that  it  was  upon  their  so  separating  themselves,  and  not 
before,  that  they  came  to  be  distinguished  by  the  titles  of  Ebion- 
ites  and  Nazarenes,  and  were  numbered  amongst  the  corrupters 
of  Christianity.  Previously  to  their  acting  thus,  they  were  re- 
garded by  no  one  in  any  other  light  than  as  true  christians. 
During  the  first  century,  they  certainly  had  not,  by  any  means, 
forfeited  their  claim  to  the  title  of  brethren,  although  they  had 
given  proofs  of  weakness,  and  a  want  of  further  light.  Her- 
etics, it  is  true,  they  became,  but  this  was  at  a  subsequent 
period,  when  they  refused  any  longer  to  hold  fellowship  with 
those  who  had  discernment  enough  to  perceive,  that  Christ  had 
relieved  the  necks  of  even  the  Jews  themselves  from  the  yoke 
and  burden  of  the  law."^ 

Indeed,  this  very  case,  of  difference  of  customs  in  different 
churches,  is  provided  for  in  the  word  of  God,  in  reference  to  a 
point  in  which  the  subject-matter  of  division  was,  to  say  the 
very  least,  as  important  as  those  questions  of  polity  which  sepa- 
rate  the  reformed  churches,  and  which  are  made  excuses  for 

1)  See  Gieseler's  Eccl.  Hist.  vol.  self  as  "  confidently  believing,  that  in 
i.  p.  81  ;  Clarkson's  Primitive  Epis-  Rome,  as  in  Corinth,  there  were  two 
copacy,  pp.  7d,  lOG-lOD;  Vidal's  communities,  a  Petrine  and  a  Paul- 
Mosheim,  vol.  i.  p.  288,  et  seq. ;  ine,  a  Judaizing  and  a  Hellenizing 
King's  Primitive  Church,  p.  155.  church." 

2)  Mr.  Miiman,  in  his  recent  His- 
tory of  Christianity,  expresses  him- 


518  UNIFORMITY    IN    RITES    NOT    ESSENTIAL.  [LECT.  XXI. 

non-intercourse,  alienation,  and  lordly  claims  to  ascendancy  and 
power.  "Jewish  converts,"  says  llie  author  of  Unity  and 
Schism,  "  were  permitted  to  practise  circumcision,  and  to  observe 
other  parts  of  the  Mosaic  law,  so  long  as  they  did  not  attempt 
to  enforce  the  observance  of  such  things  on  their  Gentile  breth- 
ren ;  but  the  moment  they  did  so,  apostolic  authority  interpo- 
sed ;  'subjection'  was  not  yielded,  'no,  not  for  an  hour.' 
In  Paul's  epistle  to  the  churches  of  Galatia,  we  have  an  account 
of  a  case  in  which  such  an  infringement  of  christian  liberty  was 
attempted,  by  '  false  brethren  unawares  brought  in.'  '  How- 
ever,' says  the  apostle,  '  not  even  Titus,  who  was  with  me, 
though  a  Greek,  was  compelled  to  be  circumcised.'  Those 
who  attempted  to  enforce  on  their  brethren,  converted  from 
among  the  Gentiles,  the  observance  of  the  Mosaic  ritual,  re- 
ceived from  the  Spirit  of  God,  by  the  mouth  of  Peter,  this 
severe  rebuke  :  '  Why  tempt  ye  God,  to  put  a  yoke  upon  the 
neck  of  the  disciples,  which  neither  our  fathers  nor  we  were 
able  to  bear?'  " 

"So  long  as  circumcision,  and  other  Jewish  rites,  were 
merely  permitted,  and  while  those  who  observed  them,  were  re- 
garded as  '  weak  in  the  faith,'  as  but  imperfectly  acquainted 
with  the  true  genius  of  Christianity,  it  was  manifest  to  all,  that 
'  in  Christ  Jesus  circumcision  availeth  nothing  ;'  confidence  in 
external  rites  was  discouraged — no  ground  was  afforded  it 
whereon  to  rest.  But  once  let  the  observance  of  these  rites 
have  been  enforced  upon  all,  and  they  could  have  appeared  un- 
important no  longer.  Confidence  would,  in  many  cases,  have 
been  transferred  from  the  atonement  of  Christ  to  them  ;  the 
church  would  have  been  driven  back  on  the  '  beggarly  ele- 
ments ;'  and  the  distinctive  spirituality  of  Christianity  destroyed. 
Accordingly,  v/e  find  that  the  observance  of  Jewish  rites,  was 
conceded  to  the  weakness  and  predilections  of  Jewish  converts, 
only  so  long  as  they  did  not  esteem  or  inculcate  them  as  pos- 
sessed of  any  importance  or  efficacy  under  the  christian  dispen- 
sation. Whenever  any  of  them  began  so  to  regard  or  inculcate 
them,  their  observance  was  permitted  to  such  no  longer ;  it  was 
declared,  in  their  case,  to  be  incompatible  with  the  essence  of 
christian  character.  The  language  of  inspired  authority  to  such 
was,  '1  say  unto  you,  if  you  be  circumcised,  Christ  shall  profit 
you  nothing.  For  I  testify  again  to  every  man  who  is  circumcised, 
that  he  is  a  debtor  to  do  the  whole  law.  Christ  is  becom'3  of  none 
effect  unto  you, whosoever  of  you  are  justified  by  the  law.  Ye  are 
fallen  from  grace.  .  .  .  for  in  Christ  Jesus  neither  circumcision 
availeth  any  thing,  nor  uncircumcision,  but  faith  that  worketh  by 


LECT.  XXI.]         UNIFORMITY    IN    RITES    NOT   ESSENTIAL.  519 

love.'  Those  who  evinced  a  disposition  to  attach  importance 
to  the  observance  of  superseded  ceremonies,  necessarily  brought 
into  suspicion  the  genuineness  of  their  faith.  '  After  that  ye 
have  known  God,  or  rather  are  known  of  God,  how  turn  ye 
again  to  the  weak  and  beggarly  elements,  whereunto  ye  desire 
again  to  be  in  bondage  ?  Ye  observe  days,  and  months,  and 
times,  and  years.  I  am  afraid  of  you,  lest  I  have  bestowed 
upon  you  labor  in  vain  ...  1  desire  to  be  present  with  you  now, 
and  to  change  my  voice  ;  for  I  stand  in  doubt  of  you.'  In  ac- 
cordance with  this,  we  find  that  separation  of  Jewish  from  Gen- 
tile brethren,  on  account  of  differences  subsisting  between  them 
regarding  ceremonial  observances,  was  emphatically  condemned 
by  the  same  apostle,  not  only  as  inimical  to  christian  unity,  but 
also  as  tending  to  the  subversion  of  the  gospel,  by  re-investing 
with  importance  such  observances.  '  When  Peter  came  to 
Antioch,'  says  he,  '  I  withstood  him  to  the  face,  because  he 
was  to  be  blamed.  For,  before  that  certain  came  from  James, 
he  did  eat  with  the  Gentiles  ;  but  when  they  were  come,  he 
withdrew,  and  separated  himself,  fearing  them  who  were  of  the 
circumcision.  And  the  other  Jews  dissembled  likewise  with 
him  ;  insomuch  that  Barnabas  was  carried  away  with  their  dis- 
simulation. But  when  I  saw  that  they  walked  not  uprightly, 
according  to  the  truth  of  the  gospel,  I  said  unto  Peter,  before 
them  all,  If  thou,  being  a  Jew,  livest  after  the  manner  of  the 
Gentiles,  and  not  as  do  the  Jews,  why  compellest  thou  the 
Gentiles  to  live  as  do  the  Jews?  We  who  are  Jews  by  nature, 
and  not  sinners  of  the  Gentiles,  knowing  that  a  man  is  not  justi- 
fied by  the  works  of  the  law,  but  by  the  faith  of  Jesus  Christ, 
even  we  have  believed  on  Jesus  Christ,  that  we  might  be 
justified  by  the  faith  of  Christ,  and  not  by  the  works  of  the  law  : 

for  by  the  works  of  the  law,  shall  no  flesh  be  justified If 

righteousness  come  by  the  law,  then  Christ  is  dead  is  vain.'" 

That  such  diversities  of  forms,  order,  and  ceremonies  existed 
in  the  early  as  well  as  in  the  later  churches,  let  the  canons,  de- 
crees, and  the  various  draughts  of  its  worship  and  order,  and  all 
differing  from  one  another,  so  that  scarcely  two  writers  can 
be  found  to  coincide  as  to  all  important  matters  —  let  these  bear 
WMtness.  Let  the  differences  between  the  churches  of  different 
countries,  and  between  the  same  church,  when  viewed  at  differ- 
ent periods  of  time,  bear  witness."  Let  the  wide  contrast  between 

1)  See  pp.  26-32.  dent  christian,  than  to  conform  to  the 

2)  Augustine,  speaking  of  differ-  practice  of  that  particular  church, 
ences  of  rites,  says,  "  there  is  nothing  which  he  may  happen  to  visit."  Epist. 
more  becoming  a  dignified  and  pru-  118,  ad  Januar.  cap.  ii. 


520  UNIFORMITY    IN   RITES   NOT   ESSENTIAL.  [LECT.  XXI. 

the  Oriental,  Greek,  Western,  and  Anglican  churches,  as  now 
constituted  and  ordered,  bear  witness. 

For  many  ages,  we  are  well  certified,  there  was  no  uniformity 
in  the  creeds  adopted  at  pleasure  by  each  church  severally.* 
Each  bishop  was  supreme  in  his  own  diocese,  subject  only  to 
Christ,  and,  therefore,  there  could  not  two  be  found  agreeing  in 
the  same  order  of  public  worship,  or  in  the  same  prayers.  Even 
after  liturgies  were  introduced,  which  they  were  not  generally 
for  several  centuries  after  Christ,'^  there  was  no  uniformity  among 
the  churches  even  of  the  same  state  or  kingdom.^  And  so  it  was, 
also,  with  respect  to  other  matters  equally  important,  as  in  the 
administration  of  the  sacraments.* 

It  is  granted,  that  even  after  Christendom  had  become  perfectly 
prelatized,  and  squared  down  by  pontifical  rules,  and  sacerdotal 
measurement,  so  as  to  exhibit  its  regular  compartments  of  par- 
ishes, dioceses,  provinces,  and  patriarchates,  yet  "  from  the  first 
there  were  portions  of  the  christian  world  which  were  not  included 
in  any  patriarchate,  but  were  governed  by  themselves.  Such 
were  the  churches  of  Cyprus,  and  such  were  the  British  churches. 
This  need  not  here  be  proved  ;  it  is  confessed  by  papists  them- 
selves." "  The  great  council  of  the  whole  christian  world  assem- 
bled at  Ephesus,  A.  D.  431,  and  made  the  following  decree: 
'  We,  therefore,  decree,  that  the  prelates  of  the  Cyprian  church- 
es shall  be  suffered  without  let  or  hindrance,  to  consecrate  bish- 
ops by  themselves  ;  and,  moreover,  that  the  same  rule  shall  he 
observed  also  in  other  dioceses  and  provinces  every  ivhere,  so  that 
no  bishop  shall  interfere  in  another  province,  which  has  not, 

1)  See  the  author's  Tract  on  A  an  end  to  the  different  schismatical 
Public  Form  of  Christian  Profession  usages  ;  that  his  design  was  to  settle 
scriptural,  reasonable,  and  in  accord-  an  uniformity  of  worship,  and  make 
ance  with  the  practice  of  the  primi-  all  disagreeing  compositions  give  way 
tive  and  other  churches.  Also  Clark-  to  the  catholic  and  Roman  office.  For 
Bon  on  the  Liturgies,  p.  100,  &c.  what  looks  more  like  indecency  and 

2)  The  oldest  reaches  not  beyond  schism  than  such  foreign  unresem- 
the  fifth  or  fourth  century,"  and  these  bling  liturgies  ;  where  the  diversities 
are  corrupted  with  false  doctrine,  and  are  so  remarkable,  that  a  priest,  who 
almost  idol  worship."  Bishop  Meade's  is  jierfectly  master  of  the  service  in 
Sermon  for  Bishop  Elliott,  p.  72.  one  diocese,  knows  nothing  of  it  in 

3)  See  Clarkson,  ut  supra,  and  another.''"  As  it  regards  the  British 
Bib.  Repert.  1830,  p.  400.  There  was  churches,  Mr.  Palmer,  in  his  Antiqui- 
no  uniformity  in  the  order  of  worship  ties  of  the  English  Ritual,  says,  "  As, 
in  Ireland  until  the  time  of  Gilieber-  however,  each  bisho[)  had  the  power 
tus  and  Malachias,  in  the  twelfth  cen-  of  making  some  improvements  in  the 
tnry.  Anselm  tells  us,  (Collier,  Eccl.  liturgy  of  his  church,  in  process  of 
Hist.  fol.  vol.  i.  pref.  p.  11,)  that  at  time  different  customs  arose,  and  sev- 
the  instance  and  command  of  many  eral  became  so  established  as  to  re- 
of  them,  he  had  drawn  up  a  form  for  ceive  the  names  of  their  respective 
divine  service,  and  gone  through  all  churches."  Vol.  i.  p.  186,  2nd  edit, 
the  offices  of  the  church.     That  he  Oxf  1836. 

engaged  in   this  undertaking  to  put  4)  Clarkson,  ibid,  pp.  84,  82,  89. 


tECT.  XXI.]     ENFORCEMENT  OF  UNIFORMITY  EARLY  REPROVED.  521 

from  the  very  first,  been  under  himseJf  and  his  predecessors ; 
and,  further,  that  if  any  one  has  so  encroached  and  tyrannized, 
he  must  rehnquish  his  claim,  that  the  canons  of  the  fathers  be 
not  infringed,  nor  the  priesthood  be  made  an  occasion  and  pre- 
tence for  the  pride  of  worldly  power,  nor  the  least  portion  of  that 
freedom  unawares  be  lost  to  us,  which  oiu*  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
who  bought  the  world's  freedom,  vouchsafed  to  us,  when  he  shed 
his  own  blood.  Wherefore  it  has  seemed  good  to  this  holy  oecu- 
menical council,  that  the  rights  of  every  province  should  be  pre- 
served pure  and  inviolate,  which  have  always  belonged  to  it,  ac- 
cording to  the  usage  which  has  ever  obtained ;  each  metropoli- 
tan having  full  power  to  act  according  to  all  just  precedents  in 
security.  And  should  any  rule  be  adduced  repugnant  to  this 
decree,  it  is  hereby  repealed.'  "i 

Such  is  the  judgment  of  Sir  Peter  King,  in  his  work  on  the 
Primitive  Church,''  as  it  regards  the  unity  of  the  church.  "  Neg- 
atively, it  consisted  not  in  an  uniformity  of  rites  and  customs  ;  for 
every  particular  church  was  at  liberty  to  follow  its  own  proper 
usages.  One  church  was  not  obliged  to  observe  the  rites  of 
another,  but  every  one  followed  its  own  peculiar  custom.  Thus 
with  respect  to  their  fast  before  Easter,  there  was  a  great  diver- 
sity in  the  observation  of  it.  In  some  churches  they  fasted  one 
day,  in  others  two,  in  some  more,  and  in  others  forty  hours  ;  but 
yet  they  still  retained  peace  and  concord,  the  diversity  of  their 
customs  commending  the  unity  of  their  faith.  So  also  the  feast 
of  Easter  itself  was  variously  celebrated.  The  Asiatic  churches 
kept  it  on  a  distinct  day  from  the  Europeans,  but  yet  still  they 
retained  peace  and  love,  and  for  the  diversity  of  such  customs, 
none  were  ever  cast  out  of  the  communion  of  the  church.  So 
likewise  writes  Firmilian,  that  in  most  provinces  their  rites  were 
varied  according  to  the  diversities  of  names  and  places,  and  that 
for  this  no  one  ever  departed  from  the  peace  and  unity  of  the 
catholic  church.  So  that  the  unity  of  the  church  universal  con- 
sisted not  in  an  uniformity  of  rites  and  usages.  Neither  in  the 
next  place  did  it  consist  in  an  unanimity  of  consent  to  the  non- 
essential points  of  Christianity,  but  every  one  was  left  to  believe 
in  those  lesser  matters  as  God  should  inform  him.  Therefore, 
Justin  Martyr,  speaklngof  those  Jewish  converts  who  had  adhered 
to  the  Mosaical  rites,  says,  that  if  they  did  this  only  through 
their,  weakness  and  imbecility,  and  did  not  persuade  other  chris- 
tians to  the  observance  of  the  same  Judaical  customs,  that  he 
woidd  receive  them  into  church-fellowship  and  communion." 
"  Whosoever  imposed  on  particular  churches  the  observance  of  the 

1)  Oxf.  Tr.  vol.  i.  pp.  03, 1)4.  2)  Part  i.  pp.  l.")4,  155. 

G6 


522  ENFORCEMENT  OF  UNIFORMITY  EARLY  REPROVED.    [lECT.  XXI. 

former  of  these  two  things,  or  in  particular  persons  the  belief  of 
the  latter,  they  were  esteemed  not  as  preservers  and  maintainers, 
but  as  violators  and  breakers  of  the  churches'  unity  and  concord." 
In  confirmation  of  this  opinion,  Sir  Peter  King  proceeds,  in 
the  second  part  of  his  work,  to  give  examples.  "  Hence,"  says 
he,'  "  every  church  peaceably  followed  her  own  customs  without 
obliging  any  other  churches  to  observe  the  same ;  or  being 
obliged  by  them  to  observe  the  rites  that  they  used ;  yet  still 
maintaining  a  loving  correspondence  and  mutual  concord,  each 
with  other  ;  as  Firmilian  writes,  that  in  most  provinces  many 
rites  were  varied  according  to  the  diversities  of  names  and 
places  ;  but  yet,  saith  he,  never  any  one  for  this  broke  the  peace 
and  unity  of  the  church.  One  church  or  bishop  did  not  in  those 
days  anathematize  another  for  a  disagreement  in  rites  and  cus- 
toms ;  except  when  Victor,  bishop  of  Rome,  through  his  pride 
and  tuibulency,  excommunicated  the  Asiatic  bishops  for  their 
different  observation  of  Easter  from  the  church  of  Rome  ;  which 
action  of  his  was  very  ill  resented  by  the  other  bishops  of  the 
christian  churches,  and  condemned  by  them  as  alien  from  peace 
and  unity,  and  contrary  to  that  love  and  charity,  which  is  the 
very  soul  and  spirit  of  the  gospel  ;  even  the  bishops  of  his  own 
party,  that  celebrated  Easter  on  the  same  day  that  he  did,  cen- 
sured his  rashness  and  violence,  as  unchristian  and  uncharitable, 
and  writ  several  letters,  wherein  they  severely  checked  him, 
as  Eusebius  reports,  in  whose  time  they  were  extant,  all  which 
are  now  lost,  except  the  fragment  of  an  epistle,  written  by  Ire- 
naeus,  and  other  bishops  of  France,  wherein  they  affirm,  that 
Victor  was  in  the  right  with  respect  to  the  time  of  Easter,  that 
it  ought  to  be  celebrated,  as  he  said,  on  the  Lord's  day,  but  that 
yet  he  had  done  very  ill,  to  cut  off  from  the  unity  of  the  church, 
those  that  observed  otherwise ;  that  it  had  never  been  known 
that  any  churches  were  excommunicated  for  a  disagreement  in 
rites,  an  instance  of  which  there  was  not  only  in  the  time  of 
Easter  itself,  but  in  the  fast  that  preceded  it ;  some  fasted  one 
day,  others  more,  some  forty  hours ;  which  variety  of  observa- 
tions began  not  first  in  our  age,  but  long  before  us,  in  the  times 
of  our  ancestors,  who  yet  preserved  peace  and  unity  amongst 
themselves,  as  we  now  do  ;  for  the  diversity  of  fasts  commended 
the  unity  of  faith  ;  and  as  for  this  controversy  concerning  the 
time  of  Easter,  the  bishops  which  governed  the  church  of  Rome 
before  Soter,  viz.  Anicetus,  Pius,  Higuinus,  Telesphorus,  and 
Xystus,  they  never  celebrated  it  at  the  same  time  with  the 
Asiatics,  neither  would  they  permit  any  of  their  people  so  to 

1)  Pt.  ii.  p.  207.  2)  See  p.  156,  &c. 


LECT.  XXI.]    UNIFORMITY  NOT  REQUIRED  IN  THE  EARLY  CHURCH.      623 

do  ;  but  yet  they  were  kind  and  peaceable  to  those  who  came 
to  them  from  those  parishes,  where  they  did  otherwise  observe 
it,  and  never  any  for  this  cause  were  thrown  out  of  the  church  ; 
even  your  predecessors,  though  they  did  not  keep  it,  yet  they 
sent  the  eucharist  to  those  that  did  keep  it ;  and  when  in  the 
times  of  Anicetus,  blessed  Polycarp  came  to  Rome,  and  there 
were  some  controversies  between  them,  they  did  not  separate 
from  one  another,  but  still  maintained  peace  and  love  ;  and 
though  Anicetus  could  never  persuade  Polycarp,  nor  Poly- 
carp, Anicetus,  to  be  of  each  other's  mind,  yet  they  communi- 
cated one  with  another ;  and  Anicetus,  in  honor  to  Polycarpus, 
permitted  him  to  consecrate  the  sacrament  in  his  church,  and 
so  they  departed  in  mutual  love  and  kindness  ;  and  all  the 
churches,  whether  observing  or  not  observing  the  same  day,  re- 
tained peace  and  unity  amongst  themselves." 

The  same  author  further  says  :'  "  A  church  collectively,  or 
the  majority  of  a  church,  with  their  bishop,  could  change  their 
old  customs,  and  introduce  new  ones,  as  was  done  in  the  affair 
of  Easter,  the  Asiatics  at  length  submitting  to  the  Roman 
usage. "- 

Similar  also  are  the  conclusions  of  the  learned  author  of  that 
now  rare  work,  "  Primitive  Episcopacy."  "  Hereby  an  account 
may  be  given  of  the  great  diversity  of  rites  and  usages  in  the 
ancient  churches.  A  single  congregation  was  a  competent 
charge  for  a  primitive  bishop,  so  that  episcopal  churches 
were  greatly  multiplied;  each  of  such  churches  had  power  to 
govern  and  order  itself,  and  so  followed  such  orders  as  every 
church  thought  fit,  without  being  obliged  to  conform  to  those  of 
others.  They  had  no  rule  nor  order,  in  things  of  this  nature, 
requiring  invariable  observance  ;  nor  did  they  regard  such  uni- 
formity, as  others,  many  hundred  years  after,  in  ages  as  many 
times  worse,  seem  fond  of.  None  of  those  churches  used  the 
same  prayers,  nor  the  Lord's  prayer,  but  only  at  the  eucharist. 
All  of  them  had  not  the  same  creed,  nor  used  any  of  their  pub- 
lic worship,  but  what  was  repeated  by  the  catechumens  at  bap- 
tism. They  had  not  the  same  rites  in  baptism,  or  the  Lord's 
supper,  nor  the  same  way  in  confirming,  marrying,  or  burying. 
They  used  not  the  same  mode,  either  in  reading  the  scriptures, 
or  singing.  They  observed  not  the  same  methods  in  admitting 
members  or  preparing  them  for  communion,  neither  in  proceed- 

1)  Pt.  ii.  ch.  vi.  p.  212.  Cambridge,    Lond.    1688,    pp.    221, 

2)  See  also  pt.  i.  ch.  ix.  §  2,  and  223.     See    also  various  authorities  in 
pt.  i.  cli.  i.  §  2.  his  work  oa  Liturgies,  Lond.    1689, 

3)  The  Rev.  David  Clarkson,  of  pp.  86-89. 


^4  UNIFORMITY   A   MERE   NOVELTY.  [lECT.  XXI. 

ing  to  censures,  nor  reconciling  peniteqts.  They  differed  in 
their  habits  and  postures.  They  varied  in  their  fasts,  both  for 
time  and  manner.  They  observed  not  the  same  festivals  ;  nor 
more,  I  think,  than  two  of  the  many  that  are  now  observed  ;  so 
very  various  were  their  usages  in  the  primitive  ages,  each  pre- 
ferring their  own  and  declining  others.  Such  as  this,  and  what 
might  be  showed  in  more  instances,  was  the  uniformity  of  the 
ancient  churches.  That  which  is  now  admired,  appears  hereby 
to  be  a  mere  novelty.  How  far  were  they  from  counting  it 
worthy  of  christian  pastors,  to  make  this  more  their  business, 
than  the  suppressing  of  sin,  and  promoting  of  real  holiness?  And 
who  can  believe,  that  they  design  or  understand  christian  peace 
and  unity,  who  hurry  all  into  divisions  and  confusions,  for  haste 
after  that  which  the  best  churches  thou2:ht  not  worth  looking 
after  ?  Those  that  have  read  the  ancients,  and  observed  their 
usages,  will  question  none  of  this,  and  so  there  is  no  need  to 
bring  particular  authorities  to  confirm  it,  only  this  in  general. 
In  Egypt,  Soz6men  tells  us,  many  cities  and  villages  not  only 
differed  from  the  observances  of  Alexandria,  and  other  towns  in 
that  country,  but  from  all  other  churches  besides.  (Hist.  1.  7, 
c.  19.)  In  Africa,  Austin  expresses  the  diversities  to  be  innu- 
merable, Nee  tainen  omnia  commemorari  potuerint,  (Retract. 
1.  2,  c.  20.)  In  other  parts  of  the  Latin  church,  Italy  particu- 
larly. Innocent  the  First  says,  that  several  churches  had  their 
several  modes  of  celebrating  :  Diverse  in  diversis  locis,  vel 
ecclesiis  ohtineri,  aut  celebrari  videntur.  (Epist.  ad  Decen- 
tium.)  In  the  Greek  church  and  elsewhere,  Socrates  gives  a 
large  account  of  their  different  rites  and  usages.  (Hist.  1.  5, 
c.  K.  /3.,  where,  after  abundance  of  instances,  he  says,  to  reckon 
up  all,  is  not  only  difficult,  but  impossible,  s^yoileq  (j^ahKov 
ds  ci^vvarov.  (See  Sozomen,  ubi  supra.)  And  yet  there 
was  no  hurt  in  all  this,  so  long  as  there  was  an  agreement 
in  the  faith,  if  we  will  believe  one  of  the  greatest  prelates  in  the 
west,  and  that  at  no  less  than  six  hundred  years  distance  from 
Christ,  in  una  fide  nihil  ojficii  sanci<x  ecclesice  diversa  consuetu- 
do,  saith  Gregory  the  first ;  ivhere  there  is  one  faith,  it 's  no 
harm  to  the  church  if  there  be  diversity  of  usages;  that  is,  the 
church  has  no  harm  for  want  of  uniformity.  Nay,  the  faith  has 
advantage  by  difference  in  rites,  says  Irenaeus  to  Victor,  in 
Euseb.  1.  5,  c.  yig  v]  ^luCpovia  tviq  vvia-rsicig  tv^v  o^j^oviuv  rvig 
itKTTeuQ  (7\)vi(7TVi7i,  a  diversity  in  less  matters  commends  the 
church,  where  there  is  an  agreement  in  points  of  faith." 

This  sentiment  of  the  early  christian  church,  in  reference  to 
diversities  of  form  and  ceremonies,  may  be  expressed  in  the  fa- 
mous declaration  of  Gregory,  bishop  of  Rome,  in  his  answer  to 


LECT.  XXI.]     UNIFORMITY  NOT  REQUIRED  BY  THE  REFORMERS.  525 

Augustine,  whom  he  had  sent  on  a  mission  to  Enj^land,  when 
he  told  him  "  he  would  have  him  use  his  liberty  in  making 
choice  of  what  he  saw  best  in  the  differing  churches,  and  if  he 
found  any  thing  that  was  more  pleasing  to  God  than  what  was  at 
Rome,  to  prefer  that."     For,  says  this  same  Gregory,  "  in  una 

FIDE,   NIHIL     EFFICIT    SANCTJE     ECCLESIiE    DIVERSA     CONSUETU- 

Do  ;  "  that  is,  where  there  is  one  faith,  there  is  no  hurt  to  the 
church  by  diversity  of  usages.  And  thus,  also,  did  lrena?us 
nobly  affirm,  ubi  S2nritus,  ibi  ecclesia,  et  omnis  gratia;  and 
again,i  he  tells  Victor,  that  their  difference  about  fasting  would 
only  consolidate  their  unity  in  the  faith. 

That  these  were  the  views  on  which  the  churches  of  the 
reformation,  and  the  fathers  of  the  English  church  harmonized, 
has  been  already  in  part  proved  —  and  maybe  at  once  perceived 
by  a  reference  to  their  confessions.  We  may  be  permitted  to 
make  a  few  quotations,  in  order  to  place  this  matter  in  a  strong 
light."  "  Let  us  remember,"  says  Luther,  "  that  all  the  rights 
and  observances  of  all  the  churches,  never  have  been  or  could 
be  uniform  and  alike.  For  the  circumstances  and  varieties  of 
men,  of  places,  and  of  times,  do  not  permit  it,  only  let  the  doc- 
trine of  faith  and  morals  be  preserved,  for  this  ought  to  be  the 
same  as  Paul  often  admonishes."  "  The  truth  and  unity  of  the 
church,"  says  the  Helvetic  confession,  "  consist  not  in  ceremonies 
and  external  rites,  but  rather  in  the  truth  and  unity  of  the  catholic 
faith.  Hence  we  read  that  among  the  ancients,  there  was  a 
manifold  diversity  of  rites ;  these  being  a  matter  of  freedom,  by 
which  no  one  ever  imagined  that  the  unity  of  the  church  was 
dissolved."  "  For  it  is  of  little  moment,"  say  the  Lutheran, 
Swiss,  Calvinistic  and  Waldensian  churches,  in  the  synod  of 
Sendomir,  in  1570,  when  they  drew  up  the  Polish  agreement, 
"  what  rites  and  ceremonies  are  employed,  provided  the  funda- 
mental doctrine  of  our  faith  and  salvation  be  preserved  entire  and 
uncorrupt."  Again,  in  1614,  at  the  general  synod,  held  at 
Tonneins,  a  plan  of  union  was  proposed,  which  was  to  allow 
each  of  the  churches  to  retain  its  independence,  and  its  own 
order,  and  among  the  rest,  as  "  not  essential  to  salvation,"  "  cere- 
monies and  church  government."'^ 

Now  that  this,  —  which  was  the  general  doctrine  of  the 
reformed  churches,  —  was  also  the  received  doctrine  of  the 
reformed  church  in  England,  has  been  already  manifested  in  the 
proofs  given  of  the  fact  that  it  has  never,  either  in  its  articles, 

1)  See  Euseb.   1.   v.  c.    xxiv. ;      form  of  worship,  &c.  are  not  ranked 
Iren.  to  Victor.  among  essentials. 

2)  See  Lect.  iii.  p.  62,  &c.  and  3)  See    quoted    in    Schism,    p. 
Harmony  of  the  Confessions  of  tlie      485,  &C, 

Ref.  Churches,  in  whicli  government, 


526      UNIFORMITY  REJECTED  BY  EARLY  ENGLISH  CHURCH.    [lECT.  XXI. 

creed,  homilies,  liturgy,  or  other  formularies,  made  those  things 
by  wiiicii  it  is  distinguished  —  as  isolated  and  peculiar  amongst  all 
the  churches  of  the  reformation  — to  be  of  divine  right,  at  least  in 
any  such  sense  as  to  be  essential  to  the  being  of  a  church,  or  to 
salvation. 1  We  may  make  another  selection,  from  that  very 
early  formulary  already  quoted,  and  whicli  was  auiliorized  by 
Henry  Vlll.  and  all  the  bishhops.^  "  The  unity,  therefore,  of  the 
church,  is  not  conserved  by  the  bishops  of  Rome's  authority  or 
doctrine  ;  but  the  unity  of  the  catholic  church,  which  all  christian 
men  in  this  article  do  profess,  is  conserved  and  kept  by  the  help 
and  asistance  of  the  Holy  Spirit  of  God,  in  retaining  and  main- 
taining of  such  doctrine  and  profession  of  christian  faith,  and 
true  observance  of  the  same,  as  is  taught  by  the  scripture  and 
the  doctrine  apostolic.  And  particular  churches  ought  not  in 
the  said  doctrine  so  accepted  and  allowed,  to  vary  one  from 
another  for  any  lucre,  arrogance,  or  any  other  worldly  affection, 
but  inviolably  to  observe  the  same,  so  that  by  reason  of  that 
doctrine  each  church  that  teacheth  the  same  may  be  worthily 
called  (as  it  is  indeed)  an  apostolic  church,  that  is  to  say,  fol- 
lowing such  teaching  as  the  apostles  preached,  with  ministration 
of  such  sacraments  as  be  approved  by  the  same." 

"And  this  unity  of  the  holy  church  of  Christ  is  not  divided 
by  distance  of  place,  nor  by  diversity  of  traditions  and  ceremonies 
diversely  observed  in  divers  churches,  for  good  order  of  the 
same.  For  the  church  of  Corinth,  and  of  Ephese,  were  one 
church  in  God,  though  the  one  were  far  distant  in  place  from 
the  other :  and  though  also  in  traditions,  opinions  and  policies, 
there  was  some  diversity  among  them,  likewise  as  the  Church  of 
England,  Spain,  Italy,  and  Poole,  be  not  separate  from  the  unity, 
but  be  one  church  in  God,  notwithstanding  that  among  them 
there  is  great  distance  of  place,  diversity  of  traditions,  not  in  all 
things  unity  of  opinions,  alteration  in  rites,  ceremonies  and 
ordinances,  or  estimation  of  the  same,  as  one  church  peradven- 
ture  doth  esteem  their  rites,  traditions,  laws,  ordinances,  and 
ceremonies,  to  be  of  more  virtue  and  efficacy  than  another  church 
doth  esteem  the  same.  As  the  church  of  Rome  doth  affirm 
certain  of  their  laws  and  ordinances  to  be  of  such  estimation  that 
they  be  of  equal  force  with  the  word  of  God,  and  that  whosoever 
disobeyeth  or  transgresseth  the  same  committeth  deadly  sin  ;  yet 
we  perceiving  the  same  to  be  discrepant  from  the  truth  of  scrip- 
ture, must  needs  therein  dissent  from  them.  But  such  diversity 
in  opinions,  and  other  outward  manners  and  customs  of  policy, 

1)  See  Lect.  iii.  p.  63,  and  Lect.      or  Form,  of  Faith  in  reign  of  Henry 
xvi.  passim.  VIII.  Oxf.  1828,  p.    46. 

2)  Erudition  for  any  Christ.  Man. 


LECT.  XXI.]    UNIFORMITY  REJECTED  BV  EARLY  ENGLISH  CHURCH.      527 

doth  not  dissolve  and  break  the  unity  which  is  in  one  God,  one 
faith,  one  doctrine  of  Clirist  and  his  sacraments,  preserved  and 
kept  in  these  several  churches,  without  any  superiority  or  pre- 
eminence, that  o::e  church  by  God's  law  may  or  ought  to  chal- 
lenge over  another." 

"  And  therefore  the  church  of  Rome,  being  but  a  several 
church,  challenging  that  name  o(  catholic  above  all  other,  doeth 
great  wrong  to  all  other  churches,  and  doeth  only  by  force  and 
maintenance  support  an  unjust  usurpation  ;  for  that  church  hath 
no  more  right  to  that  name  than  the  church  of  France,  Spain, 
England,  or  Portugal,  which  be  justly  called  catholic  churches, 
in  that  they  do  profess,  consent,  and  agree  in  one  unity  of  true 
faith  with  other  catholic  churches.  This  usurpation,  before 
rehearsed,  well  considered,  it  may  appear,  that  the  bishop  of 
Rome  doeth  contrary  to  God's  law  in  challenging  superiority 
and  preeminence  by  a  cloak  of  God's  law  over  all.  And  yet 
to  make  an  appearance  that  it  should  be  so,  he  hath  and  doth, 
wrest  scriptures  for  that  purpose  contrary  both  to  the  true  mean- 
ing of  the  same,  and  the  interpretation  of  ancient  doctors  of  the 
church  ;  so  that  by  that  challenge  he  would  not  do  wrong  only 
to  this  church  of  England,  but  also  to  all  other  churches,  in 
claiming  this  superiority  without  any  authority  by  God  so  to 
him  given  ;  for  God  by  his  goodness  hath  called  indifferently 
and  equally  all  such  churclies  in  sundry  places,  as  his  high  wis- 
dom hath  thought  good  to  assemble  and  call  unto  him." 

"It  is  to  be  noted,  that  this  church  of  England,  and  other 
known  particular  churches,  in  which  Christ's  name  is  truly  hon- 
ored, called  on,  and  professed  in  faith  and  baptism,  be  members 
of  the  whole  catholic  church,  and  each  of  them  by  himself  is 
also  worthily  called  a  catholic  church,  when  they  merely  profess 
and  teach  the  faith  and  religion  of  Christ,  according  to  the 
scripture  and  the  apostolic  doctrine.  And  so  every  man  ought 
to  honor,  give  credence,  and  to  follow  the  particular  church  of 
that  region  so  ordered,  (as  afore,)  wherein  he  is  born  or  inhab- 
iteth." 

The  ground  so  elaborately  defended  by  the  celebrated  Hooker, 
in  his  ever-famous  work,  the  Ecclesiastical  Polity,  however  objec- 
tionable in  many  points  it  may  be,  yet  most  fully  sustains  this  po- 
sition we  are  maintaining.  Neal,  in  his  History  of  the  Puritans, 
has  thus  carefully  deduced  Hooker's  first  six  propositions.' 

"  That  though  the  holy  scriptures  are  a  perfect  standard  of 
doctrine,  they  are  not,  therefore,  of  discipline  or  government ;  nor 
is  the  practice  of  the  apostles  an  invariable  rule  or  law  to  the 

1)  See  ch.  viii  vol.  i.  p.  446. 


528 


UNIFORMITY   EEJECTED   BY   HOOKER.  [lECT.  XXI. 


church  in  succeeding  ages,  because  they  acted  according  to  the 
circumstances  of  the  church  in  its  infant  and  persecuted  state  ; 
neither  are  the  scriptures  a  rule  of  human  actions,  so  far  as  that 
whatsoever  we  do  in  matters  of  rehgion  without  their  express  direc- 
tion or  warrant,  is  sin,  but  many  things  are  left  indifferent:  the 
church  is  a  society  hke  others,  invested  with  powers  to  make 
what  laws  she  apprehends  reasonable,  decent,  or  necessary,  for 
her  well-being  and  government,  provided  they  do  not  interfere 
with  or  contradict  the  laws  and  commandments  of  holy  scrip- 
ture :  where  the  scripture  is  silent,  human  authority  may  inter- 
pose ;  we  must  then  have  recourse  to  the  reason  of  things  and 
the  rights  of  society.  It  follows  from  hence  that  the  church  is  at 
liberty  to  appoint  ceremonies  and  establish  order  within  the  lira- 
its  above  mentioned.'" 

Similar  is  the  judgment  given  even  by  the  ultramontaine  di- 


1)  "But  we  must  note,"  says 
Hooker,  (Eccl.  Pol.b.iii.  Sect.  ii.  and 
§  i.  iv.  pp.  207,  205,  210,)  "  that  he 
which  affirmeth  speech  to  be  necessa- 
ry amonorst  all  men  throughout  the 
world,  doth  not  thereby  import  that 
all  men  must  necessarily  speak  one 
kind  of  language  ;  even  so  the  neces- 
sity of  polity  and  regiment  in  all 
churches  may  be  held  without  hold- 
ing any  one  certain  form  to  be  neces- 
sary in  them  all." 

"  In  which  consideration,  as  the 
main  body  of  the  sea  being  one,  yet 
within  divers  precincts  hath  divers 
names ;  so  the  catholic  church  is  in  like 
sort  divided  into  a  number  of  distinct 
societies,  every  of  which  is  termed  a 
church  within  itself." 

"  We  teach,  that  whatsoever  is 
unto  salvation  termed  necessary  by 
way  of  excellency  ;  whatsoever  it 
standeth  all  men  upon  to  know  or  to 
do,  that  they  may  be  saved  ;  whatso- 
ever there  is  whereof  it  may  truly  be 
said,  This  not  to  believe  is  eternal 
death  and  damnation  ;  or.  This  every 
soul  that  will  live,  must  duly  ob- 
serve ;  of  which  sort  the  articles  of 
christian  faith,  and  the  sacraments  of 
the  church  of  Christ  are ;  all  such 
things,  if  scripture  did  not  compre- 
hend, the  church  of  God  should  not 
be  able  to  measure  out  the  length  and 
tlie  breadth  of  that  way,  wherein  for- 
ever she  is  to  walk  ;  heretics  and 
schismatics  never  ceasing,  some  to 
abridge,  some  to  enlarge,  all  to  per- 
vert and  obscure,  the  same.  But  as 
for  those  things  that  are  accessory 


hereunto,  those  things  that  so  belong 
to  the  way  of  salvation  as  to  alter 
them,  is  no  otherwise  to  change  that 
way,  than  a  path  is  changed  by  alter- 
ing only  the  uppermost  face  tliereof ; 
which,  be  it  laid  with  gravel,  or  set 
with  grass,  or  paved  with  stone,  re- 
maineih  still  the  same  path  ;  in  such 
things,  because  discretion  may  teach 
tlie  church  what  is  convenient,  we 
hold  not  the  church  further  tied  here- 
in unto  scripture,  than  that  against 
scripture  nothing  be  admitted  in 
the  church,  lest  that  path  which 
ought  always  to  be  kept  even, 
do  thereby  come  to  bo  overgrown 
with  brambles  and  thorns.  If  this  be 
unsound,  wherein  doth  the  point  of 
unsoundness  lie  ?  It  is  not,  that  we 
make  some  things  necessary,  some 
things  accessory  and  appendant  only  ; 
for  our  Lord  and  Saviour  himself  doth 
make  that  difference,  by  terming  judg- 
ment, and  mercy,  and  fidelity,  witli 
other  things  of  like  nature, '  the  great- 
er and  weightier  matters  of  the  law.' 
Is  it,  th'^n,  in  that  we  account  cere- 
monies, (wherein  we  do  not  comprise 
sacraments,  or  any  other  the  like 
substantial  duties  in  the  exercise  of 
religion,  but  only  such  external  rites 
as  are  usually  annexed  unto  church- 
actions.)  is  it  an  oversight,  that  we 
reckon  these  things  and  matters  of 
GOVERNMENT  in  the  number  of  things 
accessory,  not  tilings  necessary  in 
such  sort  as  has  been  declared  .'  Let 
them,  which,  therefore,  think  us 
blarneable,  consider  well  their  own 
words." 


LECT.  XXI.]        UNIFORMITY   NOT   EVEN   NOW   LEGALIZED.  529 

vines  of  the  present  Oxford  school.  They  do  not  build  upon 
"  episcopacy,"  which  they  regard  as  *'  but  an  accident ; '"  but 
solely  upon  that  "  ministerial  succession,"  "to  their  ministerial 
office,"  "  by  appointment  of  the  apostles,"  "  every  link  in  the 
chain  of  which  is  known  from  St.  Peter  to  our  present  metropol- 
itans."" These  are  their  words:  "We  need  not  deny  to  the 
church  the  abstract  right  (however  we  may  question  the  propri- 
ety) of  altering  its  own  constitution.  It  is  not  merely  because 
episcopacy  is  a  better  or  more  scriptural  form  than  presbyterian- 
ism,  (true  as  this  may  be  in  itself,)  that  episcopalians  are  right, 
and  presbyterlans  are  wrong ;  but  because  the  presbyterian  min- 
isters have  assumed  a  power  which  was  never  intrusted  to  them. 
They  have  presumed  to  exercise  the  power  of  ordination,  and  to 
perpetuate  a  succession  of  ministers,  without  having  received  a 
commission  to  do  so." 

So  also  in  describing  wherein  the  unity  of  the  church  consists, 
there  is  nothing  in  their  language,  when  properly  understood, 
which  does  not  fully  harmonize  with  the  doctrine  here  main- 
tained.^ "  In  like  manner  the  christian  church  was,  in  the  be- 
ginning, set  up  in  unity  ;  unity  of  doctrine,  or  truth,  unity  of 
discipline,  or  Catholicism,  unity  of  heart,  or  charity.  In  spite 
of  the  heresies  which  then  disturbed  the  repose  of  christians, 
consider  the  evidences,  which  present  themselves  in  ecclesiasti- 
cal history,  of  their  firm  endurance  of  persecution,  their  tender 
regard  for  the  members  of  Christ,  however  widely  removed  by 
place  and  language,  their  self-denying  liberality  in  supplying 
their  vi^ants,  the  close  correspondence  of  all  parts  of  the  body 
catholic,  as  though  it  were  but  one  family,  their  profound  reve- 
rential spirit  towards  sacred  things,  the  majesty  of  their  religious 
services,  and  the  noble  strictness  of  their  life  and  conversation. 
Here  we  see  the  'rod'  of  the  priesthood,  budding  forth  with 
fresh  life  ;  the  *  manna '  of  the  christian  ordinances  uncorrupted  ; 
the  *  oracle  '  of  tradition  fresh  from  the  breasts  of  the  apostles  ; 
the  *  law '  written  in  its  purity  on  '  the  fleshly  tables  of  the 
heart ; '  the  '  sheckinah,'  which  a  multitude  of  martyrs,  saints, 
confessors,  and  gifted  teachers,  poured  throughout  the  temple. 
But  where  is  our  unity  now  ?  our  ministrations  of  self-denying 
love?  our  prodigality  of  pious  and  charitable  works?  our  reso- 
lute resistance  of  evil  ?  We  are  reformed  ;  we  have  come  out 
of  Babylon  and  have  rebuilt  our  church  ;  but  it  is  Ichabod  ;  '  the 
glory  is  departed  from  Israel.'  " 

We  shall  only  further  refer  to  the  testimony  of  Archbishop 

1)  Oxf.  Tr.  vol.  i.  p.  44.  3)  Ibid,  pp.  240,  241. 

2)  Oxf.  Tr.  vol.  i.  pp.  44, 45. 

67 


530  UNIFORMITY    DISALLOWED   BY    POTTER.  [LECT.  XXI. 

Potter,  as  given  in  that  work  of  his,  which  is  considered  the  pal- 
ladium of  prelatic  rights.' 

To  show  the  conclusiveness  of  this  position,  in  regard  to  the 
established  opinion  of  the  English  church,  so  far  as  it  bears  on 
our  present  inquiry,  and  as  it  affects  the  question  of  episcopacy, 
we  must  observe  that  episcopacy  is  not  only  "  an  accident,"  as 
the  Oxford  tractators  describe  it,  but  that  "  confirmation,  ordi- 
nation, episcopacy,"  &c.  are  enumerated  by  Mr.  Palmer,  in  his 
Treatise  on  the  Church,  as  among  the  rites  of  the  church. '^ 

We  are  aware  that  there  are  other  marks  whereby  it  is  alleged 
a  true  church  must  be  distinguished  ;  as  antiquity,  sanctity, 
multitude,  and  even  miracles ;  but  at  present,  it  will  be  sufficient 
to  say  of  them,  as  Archbishop  Usher  has  said,  "  either  they 
are  accidental,  and  in  a  great  part  separable,  or  utterly  imperti- 
nent, and  forged  for  the  upholding  of  the  Romish  synagogue,"  — 
and  that  it  is  our  bounden  duty  to  separate  from  whatever  church 
is  "  apparently  separate  from  Christ,  in  respect  either  of  man- 
ners, doctrine,  or  form  of  public  worship."* 

We  have  thus,  my  brethren,  endeavored  to  conduct  you 
through  the  intricacies  of  this  perplexing  question,  which  has 
indeed  been  purposely  obscured,  in  order  more  entirely  to  subju- 
gate the  people  to  the  authority  and  government  of  the  church ; 
that  is,  to  the  prelatic  order  in  the  church. 

We  have  shown  you  first,  what  is  essential  to  the  being,  and  of 
course  to  the  continuance,  of  a  true  church  of  Jesus  Christ ;  and 
secondly  what  is  not  thus  essential  either  to  the  existence  or  suc- 
cession of  such  a  church.  Wherever  we  can  discover  the  one 
Lord,  one  faith,  and  one  baptism,  of  the  scriptures  —  wherever 
there  is  the  acknowledgment  and  profession  of  the  one,  true,  and 
adorable  Redeemer,  and  of  the  great  cardinal  doctrines  of  his 
glorious  gospel  of  grace  and  mercy — wherever  there  is  a  due 
celebration  of  his  ordinances,  whereof  baptism  is  the  initiation  — 
there  is  a  true  church  of  Christ  — a  limb,  a  member  of  that  one 

1)    Potter    on  Church    Govern-  should  not  have  the  same  authority 

ment,    pp.    231,    283.     "  There   are,  which  was  exercised  by  all  societies 

indeed,"     says     Archbishop    Potter,  whatever."     "  In  the  next  ages   after 

"  standing  and  perpetual  laws  in  the  the   apostles,   we  find  different  rules 

church,  like  the   charters  of  corpora-  and   customs  in    different   churches  ; 

tions,  which  can  receive  no  addition  vvliich  is  a  proof,  that  the  apostles  did 

or  diminution  from  any  authority,  but  not    institute    these   customs  by  any 

that   which   first   gave    them   force;  express  precepts  from  God,  for  then 

such  are  the  articles  of  faith,  and  the  they  would  have  been  more  uniform, 

moral    duties  of  Christianity,  as  was  but  followed  tlieir  own  judgment  and 

before  observed.     But,  then,  in  deter-  inclination." 

mining  matters  of  order  and  decency,  2)  Vol.  ii.  p.   71. 

which'never  were,  or  can  be  fixed  by  3)  The  Sum   and   Substance   of 

constant  and  invariable  rules,  no  rea-  the  Christian  Religion,  pp,  376,  377, 

son  can   be   given   why  the  church  Lond.  1677. 


LECT.  XXI.]   HOW  THE  TRUE  CHURCH  IS  TO  BE  SOUGHT.       531 

body  of  which  Christ  is  head.  Agreement  in  these  particulars, 
and  such  an  agreement  carried  out  in  tlie  spirit  of  love,  and  kind- 
ness, and  mutual  charity  —  this  is  the  true  unity  of  the  church. 
The  denial  or  rejection  of  any  one  or  all  of  these,  or  the  enforce- 
ment of  any  other  matters,  as  articles  of  belief,  or  as  fundamen- 
tals in  religion,  and  as  thus  necessary  to  communion  with  the  holy 
catholic  church  ;  this  is  schism,  and  they  who  are  thus  guilty,  are 
schismatics.  Resistance  to  all  such,  whether  Romanists,  Angli- 
can, Greek  or  Oriental,  is  a  christian  duty ;  and  the  only  way  to 
preserve  charity,  and  deliver  the  universal  church  from  the  bond- 
age of  an  intolerant  and  schismatic  despotism. 

We  are  not  to  look  for  the  church  —  "  the  Lamb's  bride  "  —  by 
any  geographical  chart,  as  if  circumscribed  by  any  local  or  ter- 
ritorial limits.  We  are  not  to  seek  for  her  historically,  as  if  her 
march  could  be  tracked  by  the  stoppings  of  a  stately  prelacy, 
moving  on  in  an  unbroken  line  of  hereditary  dignitaries.  We 
are  not  to  seek  for  her  nationally,  as  if  she  were  wedded  to  any 
earthly  potentate  or  power.  Neither  are  we  to  search  for  her 
outwardly,  as  if  her  nature  consisted  in  any  external  ceremo- 
nies ;  in  pomp  of  service;  in  solemnity  of  ritual;  or  orders  of 
attendant  ministries  ;  or  in  the  trappings  of  any  showy  and  be- 
loved drapery.  Would  we  find  this  heavenly  visitant — this 
angel  of  the  covenant  —  this  kingdom  of  heaven  —  this  divine 
ark  —  this  true  tabernacle  and  temple  not  made  with  hands  — 
then,  my  brethren,  we  must  seek  for  her  spiritually.  We  must 
first  learn  that  she  is  not  of  this  world  ;  neither  earthly  nor  sen- 
sual, nor  accordant  to  the  fashion  and  the  pride  of  carnal  and 
vain  man  ;  but  that  she  is  from  heaven,  like  heaven,  and  de- 
signed to  fit  men  for  heaven.  It  is  not  by  the  outward  archi- 
tecture, or  the  inward  garniture,  nor  by  the  wealth  and  worldly 
honor  and  fashion  of  any  church  we  are  to  adjudge  its  claims. 
These  are  not  of  the  Father,  but  of  the  world.  We  must  pass 
within.  We  must  learn  what  are  the  spiritualities  of  the  place 
—  the  doctrine  —  the  spirit,  and  the  worship,  —  before  we  can 
pronounce  upon  her  character.  That  no  one  form  of  mere 
church  polity,  is  so  essentially  connected  with  the  being  of  a 
true  church,  as  not  to  be  separable  from  it,  is  manifest  from  this 
single  fact,  that  every  one  of  them  —  not  even  excepting  pres- 
bytery, which  is,  as  we  think,  the  best  and  purest  and  most  apos- 
tolic of  them  all — has  been  found  associated  with  forms  of 
error  and  heresy ;  and  that  the  truth  of  God  has  been  found 
embosomed  in  every  one  of  them.  "  That  christian  men,"  says 
Dr.  Cook,  of  Ireland,  "should  look  deeper  than  outward  forms 
of  church  government,  may  be  rendered  evident  from  the  fact, 
that  every  possible  form  of  church  government  either  is,  or  has 


532   THE  TRUE  CHURCH  NOT  FOUND  IN  ANY  ONE  POLITY.  [lECT.  XXI. 

been,  the  vehicle  of  error  or  patron  of  apostacy.  Shall  we  exclu- 
sively confine  our  admiration  to  presbytery,  the  parity  of  its 
ministers,  and  the  simplicity  of  its  rites;  and,  because  in  one 
place  we  find  it  the  vehicle  and  defence  of  divine  truth,  shall 
we,  therefore,  pronounce  it  the  certain  and  unquestionable  mark 
of  the  only  true  church  ?  Let  us  beware  of  such  a  rash  con- 
clusion ;  let  us  turn  our  eyes  to  another  quarter,  and  we  may, 
perchance,  discover  our  all-admired  presbytery  a  ready  hiding- 
place  for  neology  and  infidelity,  and  opposing  and  denouncing 
'  the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus.'  If  we  admire  prelacy,  and  the 
splendid  array  of  its  many  clerical  orders ;  and  if  such  an  epis- 
copacy we  pronounce  essential  to  a  true  church,  and  the  neces- 
sary accompaniment  of  legitimate  ordinances  —  let  us  examine 
it  again,  and  we  discover  this  very  form  adopted,  in  all  its  gor- 
geousness,  to  conceal  the  deformities  of  the  great  *  mother  of 
harlots.'  Or,  if  we  admire  independency,  in  which  every  chris- 
tian assembly  is  considered  a  complete  church  in  itself,  without 
reference  to  the  interference  or  authority  of  any  other ;  and  if 
we  pronounce  such  a  religious  democracy  the  essential  mark  of 
the  true  church  —  let  us  turn  our  eyes  to  not  a  few  churches, 
and  observe  how  readily  it  adapts  its  forms  to  all  the  errors  of 
the  Socinian." 

"  The  truth  of  the  matter  is  this :  — the  mere  outward  form, 
its  government,  availeth  nothing  to  prove  that  a  church  is  a 
church  of  Christ.  Presbytery  in  the  church  of  Scotland  con- 
tains and  exhibits  '  the  glorious  gospel  of  the  blessed  God,' 
while  presbytery  in  Geneva  retains  scarcely  a  spark  of  its  heav- 
enly light.  Prelacy  in  England  has  retained  and  announced 
the  truth,  in  the  doctrinal  articles  of  the  national  establishment, 
and  fostered  and  accoutred  many  a  noble  champion  for  the  'help 
of  the  Lord  against  the  mighty ; '  while  prelacy  in  Rome  has 
'  made  void  the  word  of  God,'  by  the  adoption  of  vain  '  tradi- 
tions,' and  stained  red  her  hands  in  the  blood  of  the  saints  of 
God.  Independency,  in  many  places,  has  likewise  appeared  as 
an  advocate  for  the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus  ;  but  none  can  be  blind 
to  the  fact,  that  in  England  it  has  often  become  the  hot-bed  of 
the  most  pestiferous  errors."* 

What  is  a  church,  as  distinguished  from  all  other  societies, 
but  a  society  of  men  professing  their  belief  in  the  doctrines  of 
Christianity  ?  The  possession  of  that  faith,  therefore,  must  be  the 
essential  mark  whereby  any  such  church  may  be  known  to  be 
such.     Without  this  faith,  a  mere  association  of  men  is  not  a 

1)  Miss.  Sermons  and  Speeches     Belfast,  1834"  p.  27.    See  also  Dr. 
by  Ministers  of  the  Synod  of  Ulster,     Mason's  Wks.  vol-  iii.  pp.  30,  31. 


LECT.  XXI.J  TRUE  DOCTRINE  THE  ESSENTIAL  MARK  OF  THE  CHURCH.  533 

christian  church,  while  with  this  faith  it  is ;  and  thus  is  the  faith 
held  forth  by  any  such  society,  the  characteristic  feature  where- 
by its  christian  character  can  be  truly  determined. 

A  succession  in  the  true  doctrine  is  therefore  the  one — 
great  —  and  final  rule  by  which  to  admeasure  the  respective 
claims  of  them  who  say  they  are  the  churches  of  Christ.  Where 
there  is  truth  of  doctrine,  there  may  we  make  a  safe  entrance 
on  the  way  to  heaven.  Where  there  is  truth  of  doctrine,  and 
purity  of  discipline  and  order,  there  will  the  church  not  only 
subsist  and  continue,  but  increase  and  multiply  —  and  go  on 
conquering  and  to  conquer.  Piety  may  co-exist  with  great 
defects  in  church  polity ;  —  but  not  with  the  want  of  sub- 
stantial verity.  And  yet,  progressive  advancement  will  charac- 
terize the  church  just  in  proportion  to  the  union  within  her  of 
purity  of  doctrine,  and   apostolicity  of  practice. 

As  the  mark  of  the  beast  —  and  the  sure  token  of  antichrist 
in  every  form,  is  false  doctrine; — so  the  one  essential  way- 
mark  to  him  who  would  find  the  true  church  of  Christ,  is  the 
truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus.  If  there  is  any  one  point  made  clear  in 
the  word  of  God,  it  is  this.  "  To  this  end  was  I  born,  and  for 
this  cause  came  I  into  the  world,"  says  the  glorious  Founder  of 
the  church,  "  that  I  should  bear  witness  unto  the  truth."  His 
promise  to  his  disciples  is,  "  ye  shall  know  the  truth,  and  the 
truth  shall  make  you  free  ; "  for  "  God  hath  from  the  beginning 
chosen  you  to  salvation  through  sanctification  of  the  spirit  and 
belief  of  the  truth."  The  commission  of  its  ministers  is,  to  "go 
and  teach  all  nations  whatsoever  Christ  has  commanded."  The 
church  is  "  the  pillar  and  ground  of  the  truth."  In  this  "one 
faith,"  —  "  ONCE  delivered,"  she  is  "  to  stand  fast,"  —  "  to  be 
established,"  and  for  it  she  is  "  to  contend  earnestly  "  "resisting 
even  unto  blood."  Heresy,  in  the  denial  of  this  truth,  in  its 
essential  doctrines,  —  this  is  what  is  represented  as  excluding 
from,  salvation.  "He  that  believeth  shall  be  saved;  he  that 
believeth  not  shall  be  damned."  "  Though  we  or  an  angel  from 
heaven,  preach  any  other  gospel,  (i.  e.  by  perverting  it,)  let  him 
be  anathema."  To  deny  the  Lord  that  bought  us,  is  "  a 
damnable  heresy."  (2  Pet.  ii.  1.)  They  "that  confess  not 
Christ  "  —  "  they  that  deny  the  Father  or  the  Son,"  —  they  are 
"  antichrists."  (2  John  vii.)  These,  and  a  thousand  other 
passages,  in  every  page  of  the  New  Testament,  make  it  indispu- 
tably clear  that  the  truth  it  reveals  is  the  burden  and  the  glory 
of  the  church,  since  God  sanctifies  "  through  the  truth. "i 

1)  See  2  Tim.  ii.  2,   24,  25;  2  vi.  IG;  1  Cor.  ii.  2 ;  Gal.  vi.  14;  Acts 

Tim.  i.  1.3;  1  Cor.  i.   17  ;  Gal.  i.  15,  iv.  12.     See  Acts  ii.  42;  John  x.  27, 

16;  Epb.  iv.  21  ;  1  Cor.  iii.  11;  Eph.  28;  Eph.  ii.  20;  1  Tim.  iii.  15. 
iv.  13;  Col.  ii.  19;  Rom,  xii.  6;  Gal. 


534    THE  TRUTH  IS  THE  ESSENTIAL  MARK  OF  THE  CHURCH.   [LECT.  XXI, 

In  order,  then,  to  discover  the  true  church,  it  is  not  necessary 
to  ascend  to  heaven  and  there  examine  its  commission,  and  the 
charter  of  its  privileges,  and  vested  rights.  —  Neither  is  it  neces- 
sary to  descend  to  hell,  to  behold  there  the  misery  of  them,  who 
have  become  outcasts  from  her  divine  inheritance.  But  the  tal- 
isman by  which  her  virtues  may  be  tested  is  nigh  us,  even  with- 
in this  sacred  book;  and  guided  by  the  teaching  of  God's  prom- 
ised Spirit,  we  cannot  fail  to  discriminate  and  judge  truly. 

The  principle  that  true  doctrine  and  the  true  church  are  co- 
existent, which  is  thus,  as  we  have  seen,  so  constantly  and  so 
plainly  insisted  on  in  the  word  of  God,  has  been  acknowledged 
also  by  the  whole  church  of  Christ,  from  the  very  beginning 
until  now.  The  only  succession  claimed  by  the  early  fathers, 
and  upon  which  they  challenged  the  scrutiny  of  their  claims,  to 
be  members  incorporate  in  the  true  body  of  Christ,  was  a  suc- 
cession, not  in  the  divine  right  of  a  line  of  lordly  prelates,  but 
a  succession  in  the  truth.  This  constituted  their  liuho%ai^ 
or  evidences  of  the  genuineness  of  their  faith  and  divinity.  This 
succession  in  the  faith,  they  did  indeed  prove,  by  their  succes- 
sion from  the  apostles,  and  their  firm  retention  of  the  apostolic 
doctrines.  But  these  doctrines  alone  constituted  the  depositum 
of  wliich  lliey  boasted,  and  of  which  they  felt  that  they  were 
the  sacred  guardians.  Thus  speaks  Tertullian  :^  "  The  apostles 
having  obtained  the  power  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  which  was  prom- 
ised them,  in  order  to  work  miracles,  and  to  speak  boldly,  in 
all  utterance  ;  and  having  first  borne  their  testimony  to  the  faith 
in  Jesus  Christ  througliout  Judea,  and  planted  churches  there, 
went  afterwards  into  other  parts  of  the  world,  and  published  the 
same  doctrine  of  the  same  faith  to  the  Gentiles;  and  so  pro- 
ceeded to  found  churches  in  every  city :  from  which  afterwards 
other  churches  borrowed,  and  still  continue  to  borrow  the  off- 
shoots of  their  faith,  and  the  seeds  of  their  doctrine,  that  so  they 
might  become  churches.  And  by  this  means  they,  also,  are 
reputed  apostolical,  as  being  the  offspring  of  the  apostolical 
churches.  Every  kind  of  which  must  be  accounted  of  accord- 
ing to  its  original.  And  therefore  so  many  and  great  churches 
are  nothing  else  but  that  primitive  one,  from  which  all  the  rest 
pro(2eed.  Thus  they  are  all  primitive,  and  all  apostolical, 
whilst  they  all  agree  in  one  and  the  same  truth;  whilst  there  is 
amongst  them  a  communication  of  peace,  and  an  appellation  of 
brotherhood,  and  a  league  of  hospitality  ;  which   rights  are  no 

])  De    prcescript.    Heret.   c.    xx.  pp.  57.  49,  and   King's  Prim.Ch.pt. 

See  also  quoted    in  the  Oxf.  Tr.  vol.  ii.  p.  202,  and  Potter  on  Ch.  Gov.  p. 

i.  pp.  378,  G-'jo,  .'356,  and  other  similar  159. 
quotations   in    Powell  on    Ap.  Succ. 


XECT.  XXI.]      THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  FATHERS.  335 

Otherwise  to  be  preserved  inviolable,  than  by  mi  uniform  deliv- 
ery of  the  same  docirine.^^  Again,  he  says,  "  Custom  takes  its 
rise  from  ignorance  and  simplicity,  which  by  succession  is  cor- 
roborated into  use,  and  so  vindicated  against  the  truth.  But 
our  Lord  Christ  hath  called  himself  truth,  and  not  custom  j 
wherefore,  if  Christ  was  always,  and  before  all,  then  truth  was 
first  and  ancientest.  It  is  not  so  much  novelty  as  verity,  that 
confutes  heretics.  Whatsoever  is  against  truth  is  heresy, 
although  it  is  an  old  custom.'" 

Irenseus  distinctly  refers  to  the  unity  of  the  church's  doc- 
trines. Thus  having  recited  a  creed,  or  a  short  summary  of  the 
christian  faith,  not  much  unlike  to  the  apostles'  creed,  he  imme- 
diately adds,  "  the  church  having  received  this  faith  and  dootrine, 
although  dispersed  through  the  whole  world,  diligently  preserves 
it,  as  though  she  inhabited  but  one  house,  and  accordingly  she 
believes  these  things,  as  though  she  had  but  one  soul  and  one 
heart,  and  consonantly  preaches  and  teaches  these  things,  as 
though  she  had  but  one  mouth  ;  for  although  there  are  various 
languages  in  the  world,  yet  the  doctrine  is  one  and  the  same  to 
all  the  creatures  of  God  in  the  whole  world  :  so  the  preaching 
of  the  word  is  a  light  that  enlightens  every  where,  and  illumi- 
nates all  men  that  would  come  to  the  knowledge  of  the  truth."* 

Again  :  Ireneeus  writes,  that  those  that  introduced  new  doc- 
trines, did  divide  and  separate  the  unity  of  the  church. ^ 

Clemens  Alexandrinus  says:  "  This  unity  of  faith  followeth 
the  unity  of  origination,  because  the  true  faith  is  the  true 
foundation."* 

Lactantius  says  :*  "  But  because  an  assembly  of  heretics  think 
themselves  principally  to  be  christians,  and  that  theirs  is  the  cath- 
olic church  ;  we  must  know,  that  tliat  is  the  true  church,  wherein 
there  is  confession  and  repentance,  which  wholesomely  cures 
the  sins  and  wounds,  to  which  the  frailty  of  the  flesh  is  subject." 
He  had  just  before  said  :  "  For  when  they  are  called  Phrygians, 
or  Novations,  or  Valentinians,  or  Marcionites,  or  Anthropians, 

1)  See  Virg.  Veland.  in  King,  pt.  3)  Adv.  Hoeres.  lib.  i.  c.  x.  and 
ii.  p.  202.  That  the  regula  fidti  of  lib.  iii.  Irena3us  further  speaks,  (in 
Tertullian,  like  the  regula  xcritatis  Owen's  Wks.  vol.  xix.  p.  184.)  "  In- 
of  IrensBus,  and  the  xavav  a/.nSs/ic  of  dicabit  omnes  eos,  qui  sunt  extra  veri- 
Clement,   have  no   other  fi)undation,  talem,  id  est.  extra  ecclesiam." 

than     Scripture,     see    Bp.    Marsh's  4)  See  Stroniat.  1.  vii.  c.  xvii.  in 

Lcct.  on  Interpret,  of  Script,  pp.  15,  Pearson   on   Creed,  p.  509,  note,  and 

16.  see  lib.  ii.  c.  12. 

2)  In  King's  Primit.  Christ,  pt.  5)  De  vera  Sap.  1.  iv.  c  ult.  See 
i.  pp.  159,  160.  See  also  as  quoted  in  also  in  the  Div.  Right  of  the  Min.  pp. 
Palmer  on  the  Church,   ch.  i.  p.  31  101,  102,  another. 

and  Powell  on  Ap.  Succ.  pp.  54,  55, 
149. 


536  THE    DOCTRINE    OF   THE   FATHERS    WAS,    THAT         [lKCT.  XXI. 

or  Arians,  or  the  like,  they  cease  to  be  christians,  who,  bearing 
the  name  of  Christ,  have  assumed  human  and  external  appella- 
tions. The  only  catholic  church,  therefore,  is  that  which  retains 
true  worship." 

Justin  Martyr  teaches  the  same  doctrine.'  Having  cited  the 
words  of  Christ,  "  many  false  Christs  and  false  apostles  shall 
arise,  and  deceive  many  of  the  faithful ;"  he  continues  :  "There 
are,  therefore,  and  were,  many  who,  going  forth  in  the  name  of 
Christ,  taught  impious  and  blasphemous  doctrines  and  practices, 
and  we  may  call  them  by  the  name  of  those  men  from  whom 
each  doctrine  or  opinion  arose.  With  none  of  them  do  we  com- 
municate, knowing  them  to  be  irreligious,  impious,  unrighteous, 
iniquitous,  who,  instead  of  venerating  Jesus  Christ,  only  profess 
him  in  name." 

Irenaeus  relates*^  of  the  apostle  John,  that  when  he  went  to 
the  bath  at  Ephesus,  and  beheld  there  Cerinthus,  the  heretic, 
he  said  :  "  Let  us  fly,  lest  it  should  fall  upon  us,  for  Cerinthus, 
the  enemy  of  the  truth  is  there." 

Polycarp  himself,  when  asked  by  the  heretic  Marcion,  "  wheth- 
er he  knew  him,"  answered,  "  I  know  thee,  the  first-born  of 
Satan."  "So  great  care,"  says  Irenaeus,^  "  had  the  apostles  and 
their  disciples  not  to  communicate,  even  by  words,  with  those 
who  adulterated  the  truth  ;  as  Paul  also  said,  '  a  man  that  is  a 
heretic  after  the  first  and  second  admonition,  reject,  knowing 
that  such  a  one  is  perverted  and  sinneth,  being  condemned  by 
himself.'  " 

"  He  is  indeed  a  deacon  and  minister  of  the  divine  will,"^  says 
Clemens  of  Alexandria,  "  and  he  is  a  presbyter  of  the  church 
who  does  both  practise  and  teach  what  our  Lord  has  prescribed  ; 
not  being  reputed  just,  only  because  he  is  a  presbyter;  but 
chosen  into  the  college  of  presbyters,  because  he  was  a  just 
person :  though  such  an  one  be  not  honored  with  the  chief  seat 
here  on  earth,  he  shall  sit  on  one  of  the  twenty-four  thrones 
spoken  of  in  John's  Revelation,  judging  the  people." 

"  The  church,"  says  Jobus  Monacbus,*  "  is  composed  of  those 
who  believe  in  Christ."  "  The  church,"  says  Zonaras,  "  is 
the  congregation  twv  ^laruv  of  believers.'"'  So,  also,  Cyril 
Alexandrius,  and  Critopolus  in  his  confession  of  faith,**  the  latter 
of  whom  says,  "  others  define   the  church  to  be  the  congrega- 

1)  Dial  cum  Typho,  p.  208,  ed.  5)  In  Biblioth.  Photii.  cod.cxxii. 
3d,  in  Palmer,  vol.  i.  p.  95.  in  Suiceri.  Thes.  i.  p.  1050. 

2)  Adv.  Hceres.  lib.  iii.  c.  iii.  in  6)  Ad  Can.  st.  Gaugr.  p.  314,  in 
Palmer,  vol.  i.  p.  96.  ibid,   and  also  ad  Can  48,   Carthag. 

3)  In  ibid.  p,  431. 

4)  Stromal,  lib.  vi.  p.  667. 


LECT.  XXI.]       TRUE   DOCTRINE    IS    THE    TRUE    SUCCESSION.  537 

tion  of  those  only  who  are  orthodox,  and  who  are  sound  in 
every  doctrine.'"  "The  only  union  in  the  church,"  says  Rufi- 
nus,  who  wrote  d  treatise  on  the  creed,  '•'  is  the  unity  of  general 
belief."^  Theophilus,  of  Antioch,  describes  churches  as  "con- 
gregations in  which,  as  in  secure  island  havens,  the  truth  is 
taught  where  those  who  desire  salvation  take  refuge."^  Igna- 
tius says,  "  where  Jesus  Christ  is,  there  is  the  church."^  "  From 
all  such,"  who  have  not  the  fear  of  God,  says  Irenasus,  "  we 
ought  to  dejjart,  and  to  cleave  to  those  who  preserve,  as  we  have 
said,  the  doctrine  of  the  apostles,  and  along  with  their  order  of 
presbyters,  maintain  sound  words. "^ 

Cyprian  is  very  strong  f  "  If  the  channel  becomes  corrupted 
and  leaky,  so  that  the  water  does  not  flow  constantly  and  regu- 
larly, it  must  be  REPAIRED  in  order  to  the  supply  of  water 
to  the  citizens  coming  down  from  the  Fountain.  This  ought 
the  ministers  of  God  now  to  do,  observing  as  THEIR  RULE 
the  divine  prece])ts,  that  if  any  thing  has  tottered  and  shaken 
from  the  truth,  it  should  be  restored  to  the  authority  of  Christ, 
the  evangeli>ts  and  the  apostles  ;  and  all  our  proceedings  are  to 
take  their  RISE  there,  whence  all  order  and  divine  authority 
rise.  FOR  CUSTOM  WITHOUT  TRUTH  IS  ONLY 
ANTIQUATED  ERROR.  Therefore,  forsaking  error,  let 
us  follow  the  truth,  knowing  that,  as  in  Esdras's  opinion,  truth 
is  victorious,  so  it  is  written,  '  truth  remains  and  prevails  for 
ever,'  it  lives  and  reigns  through  endless  ages.  Neither  is 
there  with  truth  any  distinction  or  respect  of  persons,  but  only 
that  which  is  just  it  ratifies  ;  neither  is  there  in  the  jurisdiction 
of  truth  any  iniquity  but  the  strength,  and  dominion,  and  the 
majesty  and  power,  of  all  generations.  Blessed  be  the  God  of 
truth  !  This  truth  Christ  shows  in  the  gospel,  saying,  '  I  am 
the  Truth.'  Therefore,  if  we  be  in  Christ  and  Christ  in  us  ;  if 
we  remain  in  the  truth,  and  the  truth  abide  in  us,  let  us  hold 
those  things  which  are  of  the  truth." 

Firmilian  writes,  that  at  Rome,  they  did  not  observe  the  same 
day  of  Easter,  nor  many  other  customs  which  were  practised  at 
Jerusalem  ;  and  so,  in  most  provinces,  many  rites  were  varied 
according  to  the  diversities  of  names  and  places.'' 

Gregory  Nazianzen  is   also  very  explicit,**  in  his  oration  in 

1)  Suicer.  Thes.  ibid.  further  in  Div.  Right  of  Min.  pt.  ii. 

2)  See  synopsis  of  his  sentiments      p.  100. 

in  Blair's  Waldcnses,  vol.  i.  p.  7.5.  7)  Apud  Cj'prian,  Ep.   75,  §  5, 

r?")  Theopliil.  ad  Autolycum,  lib.  in  Kinor,  pt.  ii.  p.  oq.o. 
ii.  p.  123,  in  Palmer,  vol.  i.  p.  14.  8)  Aihanasii  Opera,  vol.  ii.  App. 

4)  Ep.  to  Smyrnians.  edit.    Paris,   1G27,    Orat.    in    Athan. 

5)  Adv.  Hceres.  lib.  iv.  c.  44.  Thus  Gregory  Nazianzen  says,  To  jutJ" 

6)  Ep.  74,  in  Powell,  p.  179.  See  yap    o/ucyvai/Aov,    ic-ju     cjucBfioviS,     &c. 

68 


639  TRUE   DOCTRINE  —  THE   TRUE   SUCCESSION.        [LECT.  XXI. 

praise  of  Atlianaslus.  Speaking  of  his  election  as  bishop  of  Al- 
exandria to  the  cliair  of  St.  Mark  the  evangelist,  who  is  sup- 
posed to  have  founded  that  church,  he  says,  that  Athanasius  was 
"  not  less  the  successor  of  St.  Mark's  piety  than  he  was  of  his 
preeminence.  For  if,"  says  he,  "  you  consider  Athanasius  only 
as  one  in  the  nunnber  of  the  bishops  of  Alexandria,  he  was  the 
most  remote  from  St.  Mark  ;  but  if  you  regard  his  piety,  you 
find  him  the  very  next  to  him.  This  succession  of  piety  ought 
to  be  esteemed  THE  TRUE  SUCCESSION.  For  he  who 
maintains  the  same  doctrine  of  faith  is  partner  in  the  same 
chair;  but  he  who  defends  a  contrary  doctrine,  ought,  though 
in  the  chair  of  St.  Mark,  to  be  esteemed  an  adversary  to  it." 

"  This  man,  indeed,  may  have  a  nominal  succession,  but  the 
other  has  the  very  thing  itself,  THE  SUCCESSION  IN 
DEED  AND  IN  TRUTH.  Neither  is  he  who  usurps  the 
chair  by  violent  means,  to  be  esteemed  in  the  succession  ;  but 
he  who  is  pressed  into  the  office ;  not  he  who  violates  all  law  in 
his  election,  but  he  who  is  elected  in  a  manner  consistent  with  the 
laws  of  the  case  ;  not  he  who  holds  doctrines  opposed  to  what 
St.  Mark  taught,  but  he  who  is  indued  with  the  SAME  FAITH 
as  St.  Mark.  Except,  indeed,  you  intend  to  maintain  such  a 
SUCCESSION  as  that  of  sickness  succeeding  to  health;  light 
succeeding  to  darkness ;  a  stoi-m  to  a  calm ;  and  madness  suc- 
ceeding to  soundness  of  mind. ^^ 

The  following  testimony  from  Augustine  is  very  decisive. 
"  As  if,"  says  he,^  "  antiquity,  or  ancient  custom  should  carry 
it  against  the  truth.  Thus  murderers,  adulterers,  and  all  wicked 
men  may  defend  their  crimes;  for  they  are  ancient  practices,  and 
began  at  the  beginning  of  the  world.  Though  from  hence  they 
ought  rather  to  understand  their  error;  because  that  which  is 
reprehensible  and  filthy,  is  thereby  proved  to  have  been  ill  be- 
gun, Uc. :  nor  can  it  be  made  honest  and  unreprovable  by  hav- 
ing been  done  long  ago." 

"  But  this  is  a  part  of  the  devil's  craft  and  subtilty,"  as  he  ex- 
cellently observes  in  the  same  place,  "  who,  as  he  invented  those 
false  worships,  and  sprinkled  some  juggling  tricks  to  draw  men 
into  them,  so  he  took  such  course,  that  in   process  of  time,  the 

"  The  one  is   of  the  same  judgment  ceeding  Peter."    Cathedree  successio 

with    truth,    and     sits   on    the    same  nihil  successionis   piceter  nomen  ha- 

throne,  the   other  is  of  an   opposing  bet,  sed  idem  sentiendi  successio  ver- 

judgment,  and  sils  on  a  rival  throne;  itatein    inquit.     Gregor.    Nazianz.  in 

the  one  has  the   name,  the  other  has  Math.  23,  in  Tumet.   Op.  torn.  iv.  p. 

the  reality  of  succession."     St.  Am-  217. 

brose  also  observes  :  "  He  who  has  not  1)  Qsest.  ex.  Vet.  et  Novo  Tes. 

the  failh   ot  Peter,  inherits   nothing  ii.  114,  in  Notes  of  the  Ch. 
from  Peter,  and  vainly  boasts  of  sue- 


LECT.  XXI.]  THIS    THE   DOCTRINE    OF   THE    FATHERS.  639 

fallacy  was  commended,  and  the  filthy  invention  was  excused  by 
helu^  derived  fiom  antiquity ;  for  by  long  custom  that  began 
not  to  seem  filthy,  which  was  so  in  itself.  The  irrational  vul- 
gar began  to  worship  demons,  or  dead  men,  who  appeared  to 
them  as  if  they  had  been  gods  ;  which  worship  being  drawn 
down  into  custom  of  long  continuance,  thinks  thereby  to  be  de- 
fended, as  if  it  were  the  truth  of  reason.  Whereas,  the  reason  of 
truth  is  not  from  custom,  (which  is  from  antiquity,)  but  from 
God;  who  is  proved  to  be  God,  not  by  long  continuance,  (or 
antiquity,)  but  by  eternity." 

St.  Ambrose  says,  "  They  have  not  the  inheritance,  and  are  not 
the  successors  of  Peter,  who  have  not  Peter's  faith."  And 
again  :  "  If  any  church  rejects  the  faiih,  it  cannot  possess  the 
foundation  of  apostolic  doctrine.  It  must  be,  therefore,  deserted. 
Thy  Peter  is  Christ."' 

"  The  church  is  called  one,"  says  Jerome,  '•'  because  of  the 
unity  of  the  faith. "^ 

But  it  is  unnecessary  to  enlarge.  It  has  been  shown  by  Du 
Pin  and  others,  that  by  that  rock  on  which  our  Saviour  was  to 
build  his  church/s  "  Jerome,  Augustine,  Theodoret,  Bede,  Pau- 
linus,  Rabanus,  Anselm,  Lombard,  Innocent  111.,  &c,  understand 
it  to  mean  our  Lord  himself;  and  that  the  majority  interpret  it 
of  Me  true  faith.  This,  according  to  Natalis  Alexander,  is  the 
doctrine  of  Hilary,  Gregory,  Nyssene  Ambrose,  Hilary  the  dea- 
con, Chrysostom,  Augustine,  Cyril  of  Alexandria,  Juvenalis,  Leo, 
Petrus  Chrysologus,  Theodoret,  Eucherius,  Felix  HI.,  Gregory 

1)  De  Penitentia,  lib.  i.  cap.  vi.  corpus  est  Christruno'^spiritio  vivifi- 

2)  in  Luc.  lib.  ii.  cap.  ix.  cala,  unila  tide  una,  et  sanctificata." 

3)  Jerome  in  Ps.  24,  II.  Hugo  de  Victoire  de  Sacrum,  lib.  ii. 
See    also    Newman     on    Roman-  ""^Anciently,"  sajs  Knapp,  (Theol. 

ism,  pp.  205,  266.     So  also  Cassan-  vol.    ii.    p.  489,)    nxboxm^    was     sy- 

der,  a  learned   Romish   divine,  holds  nonymous    with    cgjid'o^oi,   and    jiiks 

this  langv.age  :  "  For  there  is  to    be  catkulira  was  the  same  as  fides  orlho- 

considered,  as  to  the  chuch,  the  head  cloxa,  which  was  the  faith  held  in  op- 

and  the  body.     From  the  head,  there  position  to  heretics;  because   it  wag 

is  no  departure  hut  by  doctrine    disa-  supposed  tliat  the  Irue    faith,  which 

greeable  to  Christ,  tlie  head.     From  accords  witii  the  will   of  Christ  and 

the  body,   there   is  no   departure    by  the  fipostles,  must  be    the  universal 

diversity  of  rites    and  opinions,    but  fiith  of  all  christians,  and  be  found  in 

only  by  the  defect  of  charity."     See  all    tlie    churches  established  by  the 

in  Conder's    View   of  all  Religions,  apostles.     Hence  ecdesm  catliolica  is 

p.  9.  tii.'it    qvm    ha  bet  fidcvi    sive  veritatem 

Jerome,  as  quoted   in   Dr.   Barrow,  ca<//o/2c«7R,  i.  e.  tiieri?jh.t and  pure  doc- 

(Hier.  Ps.   132,  in   Barrow,  vol.   i.  p  trine  and  constitution,   in  opposition 

771,)  has  this  strong    enunciation  of  to  those  churches  which  hnve  not  the 

the  truth  of  our  position.    (^T'holicam  pure  apostolic  doctrine,  but  beloni:  to 

facit  simplex  et  verus  intellecta^,  in-  the  heretics."     That   tlie   succession 

teJiigere  singulare,  ac  verissimum  sa-  ol'the  fathers  was  a  doctrinal  succes- 

cramentum,  et  unitasanemovum.  Ec-  sion.     Turretini  Opera,   torn.   iii.    p. 

clesia  non  parietibus  consistit  sed  in  32. 
dogmatum    Teritee.     Ecclesia  sancla 


MO  TRUE    DOCTRINE  —  THE    TRUE    SUCCESSION.  [lECT.  XXI, 

the  Great,  Bade,  John  Damascenus,  Hadrian  I.,  Druthmar,  Jo- 
nas Aurelianensis,  Hlnemar,  Nicholus  I.,  John  VIII.,  Theopha- 
nes,  Theodorus,  Abucara,  Stephen  VI.,  Odo  Claniacensis,  Ru- 
pert, Tuitensis,  Innocent  II.,  Hadrian  IV.,  Urban  III.,  Thomas 
Aquinas,  Stephen,  bishop  of  Paris,  Alphonsus  Tostatas,  CUcto- 
vaecus,  Eckius,  Renetus  Benedictus." 

This  same  principle,  which  is  thus  attested  as  true  by  such  a 
cloud  of  witnesses  among  the  fathers,  is  not  less  fully  declared  by 
later  writers. i  It  was  most  strenuously  urged  by  reformers  gen- 
erally .2  And  it  has  been  the  very  stronghold  in  which  the  re- 
formed churches  have  intrenched  themselves,  and  by  which  they 
have  been  enabled  to  repel  all  the  aggressive  movements  of  the 
papacy.  Nor  has  it  ever  been  denied  by  any  true  protestant 
writer,  that  true  doctrine  is  the  grand  feature  by  which  a  true 
■church  may  be  recognized,^  although  there  have  been  some, 
who,  for  the  sake  of  better  sustaining  the  fabric  of  the  prelacy, 
have  united  with  the  Romanists  in  denying  true  doctrine  to  be 
necessary  as  a  mark  of  Christ's  church.*  These  individuals, 
however,  very  consistently  reject  the  title  of  protestant,  and 
cast  odium  upon  the  glorious  reformation. 

To  say  that  this  principle,  as  being  essential  to  the  honor  of 
God  —  the  inspiration  and  glory  of  his  word  — the  detection  of 
all  errorists  —  and  the  perpetuation  of  the  church  —  has  ever 
been  maintained  and  defended  by  presbyterians,  would  be  un- 
necessary to  any  who  are  at  all  acquainted  with  our  principles. 
We  will  give  but  one  or  two  examples,  in  addition  to  what  have 
been  already  adduced. 

The  Rev.  Richard  Byfield,*  one  of  the  Westminster  divines, 
in  his  Treatise  on  the  Church  of  Christ,  thus  lays  down  the  in- 
fallible notes  of  a  true  visible  church  :  "  Wherever  Jesus  Christ 
is  held  for  the  foundation  and  corner-stone,  and  the  doctrine  of 
the  prophets  and  apostles  touching  the  faith  of  Jesus,  and  the 
commandments  of  God  that  concern  holiness  and  righteousness, 
there  is  the  true  church."  (Eph.  ii.  19,  20.)     "  Whatever  soci- 

1)  See  Palmer  on  the  Ch.  vol.  i.  375-377;  Bp.  Hall's  Wks.  vol.  viii.  ; 
pp.  28,  27.  Jackson's     Works,    ti^m.     iii.    pages 

2)  Luther  dp  Ecclesia,  in  Palm-  876,  877,  878,  888;  Pearson  on  <he 
eri.  p.  26;  Calvin's  Instit.  lib.  iv.  c.  Creed,  Art.  ix.  pp.  508-513,  527, 
i.  §  7,  9,  in  vol.  ii.  pp.  220,  221  ;  530;  Oxf  Tr.  vol.  i.  pp.  96,  44  ;  Bur- 
Harmony  of  Confessions  of  the  Ch.  net  on  39th  Art.  pp.  233,240,241,  244. 
&c.  Genevan  Conf.  in  Irving's  Conf.  See  Note  A. 

of  tJie  Ch.  of  Scoll.   p.  130;  Hooper  4)  See  Palmer  on  the  Ch.  vol.  i. 

in   Brit.   Pief.  vol.    vii.    p.    215,  218.  p.  243,  note.    Contrast,  however,  vol. 

Ridley  in  Letters  of  Martyrs,  pp.  73,  ii.  p.  110. 

74.     See  also  in  Schism,  p.  485,  487  5)  A  Short  Treatise  on  the  Ch. 

488,  498,  492.  '  of  Chr.  &c.  Lond.  1653,  4to.  pp.  28, 

3)  See  Archbishop  Usher,  in  his  30. 
Sum  and  Subst.  of  Christ.  Rel.  pp. 


LECT.  XXI.]        THIS    THE   DOCTRINE    OF    LATER    WRITERS,  541 

ety  of  men,  associating  in  a  religious  way,  do  hold  Christ  and 
the  prophets  and  apostles'  doctrine  for  faith  and  holiness,  that 
society  is  a  particular  visible  church."   (Eph.  ii.  22.) 

"In  whatever  particular  society  religious,  there  is  to  be  found 
all  the  furniture  of  the  temple,  (all  the  glory,  the  mercy-seat, 
the  two  altars,  the  table  of  shevvbread,  the  candlestick,  the 
laver,)  that  is,  a  true  particular  visible  church  —  it  is  the  temple 
of  God,  therefore  the  church  of  God.  Who  can  deny  that  tbat 
is  Zion,  where  it  can  be  truly  said,  the  tabernacle  of  God  is 
with  these  men  ?  "' 

Gerhard  lays  it  down  as  the  chief  note  of  difference  between 
an  impostor  and  a  truly  called  minister.  "  The  first  and  chief 
rule  of  trial  is,  the  harmony  and  agreement  of  the  doctrines  they 
preach  with  the  doctrine  of  the  scriptures.  For  our  Saviour 
Christ,  tells  us,  that  false  Christs  should  arise,  and  false  propels, 
and  should  show  great  signs  and  wonders,  inasmuch  (if  it  were 
possible)  they  should  deceive  the  very  elect.  And  the  apostle 
tells,  that  the  coming  of  antichrist  shall  be  after  the  working  of 
Satan,  with  all  power,  and  signs,  and  lying  wonders." 

In  the  defence  of  the  presbyterian  ministers,  against  the 
charge  of  antichristianism,  urged  against  them  by  the  indepen- 
dents, Mr.  Firmin,  in  his  Separation  Examined,  thus  defines 
antichristianism,  and  repels  the  accusation. 2  "  But  if  you 
would  know  what  is  properly  antichristianism,  I  pray  take  it 
from  a  far  more  able  man  than  myself,  one  well  known,  and 
that  deserves  honor,   Mr.  Burroughs  ;  he  well   observed,  the 

1)  In  the  same  work,  the  writer  ference  in  opinions  through  petulan- 
enumerates  among  tliose  who  defile  cy  to  put  every  opinion  into  prac- 
the  temple  of  God,  "they  that  dis-  tice  ;  note,  this  should  be  of  force  to 
cliurch  the  true  churches  of  Jesus  loose  us  in  the  building,  or  lay  us  in  a 
Christ,  because  they  are  faulty  in  frame,  wiiose  cement  and  mortar, 
discipline,  or  in  government,  and  whose  mould  and  fashion,  is  from  a 
chiefly  to  dischurch  them  when  tiiey  conspiring  in  an  opinion;  these  con- 
thirst  after,  pray  for,  use  all  means  spiracles  in  opinion,  joined  with  sep- 
God  affords  them  for  reformation."  aration  from  other  churches,  that  hold 
"  Like  to  these  also  are  tiiose  that  the  faith  of  Jesus  and  the  command- 
make  up  churches  of  those  of  their  ment.i  of  God,  are  no  right  gathering 
own  opinion,  and  separate  from  oth-  of  churches  ;  they  are  conventions, 
ers  that  do  hold  the  unity  of  faith,  sinful,  and  schismatical,  and  unlavv- 
and  the  rule  of  righteousness  ;  but  fill,  carnal,  and  prond  separations  ; 
who  can  separate  from  those  that  are  they  that  hold  one  faith  ought  in  low- 
of  the  same  faitli,  and  not  break  fel-  liness  of  mind  and  forbearance  of  one 
lowship  with  the  Lord  Jesus  ?  Dif-  another,  in  love,  to  endeavor  to  keep 
ferences  in  opinions  should  notdissun-  the  unity  of  the  spirit  in  the  bond  of 
der  us  in  affections,  much  less  make  peace.  Eph  iv.  2,  3." 
divisions,  separate  us  into  church-  2)  Separation  Examined,  &c.  by 
ways  against  church-ways  ;  the  same  G.  Firmin,  Min.  of  tlie  Ch.  in  Shul- 
faith,  and  the  same  commandments  ford,  Essex,  Lond.  JG52,  and  Bur- 
for  holiness  should  be  more  powerful  rough's  Expos,  of  Hos.  b.  i.  p.  1G2.  See 
to  cement  us  in  one  church,  than  dif-  also  pp.  8, 9,  and  dedication. 


542  TRUE    DOCTRINE THE    TRUE    SUCCESSION.       [lECT.  3CXI, 

madness  of  people,  that  cry  out  against  any  thing  that  displeases 
them,  that  it  is  antichrislianism,  then  seis  down  thus,  wherein 
it  consists  : 

1.  Whosoever  shall  obtrude  any  doctrine  upon  the  church, 
to  he  believed  by  their  own  authority. 

2.  The  intrusion  of  such  offices,  and  officers  in  the  church, 
as  merely  belong  to  the  spiritual  man. 

3.  The  imposing  of  any  ordinance,  or  new  institution,  upon 
the  church. 

4.  The  imposing  of  laws  to  bind  conscience,  as  the  laws  of 
Christ  do." 

The  views  of  these  non-conformists,  as  to  the  supreme  im- 
portance of  truth,  and  the  comparative  indifFerency  of  mere  pol- 
ity or  ceremonies,  may  be  seen  and  read  in  the  whole  history  of 
their  struggles.  It  is,  however,  true,  and  to  be  admitted,  that 
oftentimes  there  was  manifested  by  them,  in  accordance  with  the 
spirit  of  the  age,  the  most  unworthy  and  contradictory  notions, 
as  it  regards  the  toleration  of  separate  and  opposing  sects.  That 
this  spirit,  which  was  generated  by  the  extraordinary  circum- 
stances in  which  they  were  called  to  act,  was  not,  however, 
diffused  through  the  entire  body,  nor  inherited  by  their  posterity, 
will  appear  from  the  following  reply  to  this  charge,  as  urged  by 
Bishop  Stillingfleet,  from  the  sainted  Howe.^  "  For  the  assem- 
bly," says  Howe,  "  I  think  it  fit  those  that  survive  of  them 
should  be  as  much  concluded  by  what  they  then  determined,  as 
this  reverend  author  by  the  Irenicum.  But  I  know  no  reason  that 
such  as  they  never  represented,  nor  who  ever  pretended  to  be 
of  their  party,  should  be  concluded  to  the  world's  end.  Nor  do 
understand  why  even  the  same  party  may  not  be  as  well  sup- 
posed in  a  possibility,  to  vary  from  itself  in  forty  years,  as  the 
same  man  from  himself  in  less  than  twenty.  If  they  did  in- 
cline to  deal  too  hardly  with  their  brethren,  that  will  not  justify 
them  who  deal  more  hardly.  It  is  hoped  such  as  have  been  so 
inclined  have,  being  smitten,  and  having  suffered  the  rebukes  of 
the  Almighty,  repented  it,  and  are  become  wiser  ;  and  when 
some  think  themselves  grown  wiser  by  prosperity,  others  by 
adversity,  there  is  less  '-eason  to  suspect  the  latter."^ 

1)  See  Wks.  vol.  iv.  p.  433.  counted  not  that  philosophy,  which 

2)  "  Or  do  we  think,"  says  this  was  peculiar  to  this  or  that  sect,  but 
same  writer,  (see  Rogers'  Life  of  whatsoever  of  truth  was  to  be  found 
Howe,  p.  331 ,)  "  there  is  no  difference  in  any  of  them  ;  so  I  say  of  christian- 
to  be  put  between  controversies  about  ity,  't  is  not  that  which  is  appropriate 
matter  of  circumstance,  and  about  the  to  this  or  that  party,  but  whatsoever 
essentials  of  Christianity."  "As  I  of  sincere  religion  shall  be  found  com- 
oflen  think  of  that  saying  of  an  ^n-  mon  to  them  all." 

cient,  Clement  of  Alexandria,  that  he 


LECT.  XXI.]      THE    CHAEACTERISTICS    OF   A   TRUE    CHURCH.  543 

We  have  thus,  we  trust,  made  it  appear  from  scripture,  and  the 
testimony  of  the  church  at  different  periods,  and  from  numer- 
ous divines,  that  neither  unity  of  ecclesiastical  relations,  nor 
uniformity  in  ecclesiastical  polity,  rites,  and  ceremonies,  are  es- 
sential to  the  valid  constitution  of  a  true  visible  church  of  Christ, 
however  such  different  forms  may  be  believed  to  be  more  or  less 
scriptural,  and,  therefore,  more  or  less  conducive  to  prosperity, 
edification,  and  success.  It  has  also  been  shown  wherein  that 
unity,  which  is  essential  to  the  character  of  a  true  church,  does 
positively  consist.  As  it  regards  the  church  generally,  that  is  a 
true,  visible  church  of  Christ,  where  there  is  found  "  a  society 
of  visible  saints,  and  true  ministers  consenting  together  to  wor- 
ship God  in  his  holy  ordinances.'"  Here,  to  adopt  the  style  of 
the  logicians,  here  is  the  material  cause  of  a  church,  to  wit, 
visible  saints,  or  such  as  make  a  credible  profession  of  the  truth 
as  it  is  in  Jesus.  Here,  also,  is  the  formal  cause  of  such  a 
church;  that  is,  their  consenting  to  worship  God  according  to 
his  word,  in  the  observance  of  all  his  ordinances.  Wlierever, 
therefore,  there  are  such  true  believers,  and  such  a  union  in 
heart  and  purpose,  as  far  as  they  are  not  necessarily  hindered 
by  the  powers  that  be,  to  set  up  and  observe  all  God's  holy  or- 
dinances, there  are  all  the  elements  of  a  true  church,  which  is 
the  effect  or  necessary  result  of  such  a  combination. 

And,  as  to  the  ministers  of  the  church,  in  order  to  constitute 
any  individuals  true  minist(;rs  of  Christ,  they  must,  as  the  effi- 
cient cause,  be  called  by  the  spirit  of  God,  who  alone  hath  su- 
preme power  to  fit  and  qualify  for  this  his  own  service.  They 
must,  also,  as  the  material  cause  of  the  christian  ministry,  pos- 
sess such  qualifications  as  are  sufficient  to  capacitate  them  for 
the  discharge  of  its  various  functions,  (2  Tim.  ii.  2,  oiriveg  i'aumoi 
eacvrai.)  There  must  be,  also,  as  its  formal  cause,  and  order- 
ly call  or  appointment  by  those  in  authority  in  the  church  ;  and 
there  must  be,  as  the  final  end  or  cause  of  sucli  a  ministry,  and 
that  for  which  the  ministry  is  appointed  and  called  of  God,  the 
preaching  of  the  truth  ;  for  the  work  of  the  ministry  is  the 
perfecting  of  the  saints,  and  the  edifying  of  the  body  of  Christ. 
Whereverthese  causes  are  found  in  combination,  where  there  is 
a  manifestation  of  real  grace  in  the  heart,  and  an  experimental 
acquaintance  with  the  working  of  God's  spirit ;  where  the  truth 
of  God,  in  all  its  holy  mysteries,  is  received  in  the  love  of  it, 
and  proclaimed  in  the  power  of  it;  wherever  individuals,  with 
such  qualifications,  are  chosen  by  any  society  of  saints,  and  set 

1)  See  Firman's  Separation  Examined,  ut  supra,  p.  2.    See   also  Bur- 
roughs on  Hos.  pp.  8, 1. 


554  PRESBYTERIANISM   WILLING    TO    BE    TESTED.        [LECT.  XXT. 

over  them  as  their  pastors  or  ministers,  by  such  as  have  author- 
ity ;  and  wherever  God,  by  the  communication  of  his  most 
gracious  inHuences,  renders  such  a  ministration  the  power  of 
God  to  the  salvation  and  edification  of  many  souls  ;  there  do  we 
find  a  true  ministry,  and  there  do  we  perceive  a  true,  visible, 
and  organized  church  of  Jesus  Christ.  Let  him  that  would 
deny  this  conclusion  shrink  from  the  guilt  of  blaspheming  God's 
Holy  Spirit;  setting  up  human  wisdom  against  the  wisdom  of 
God ;  and  of  making  the  word  and  the  grace  of  God  of  none 
effect,  by  vain  traditions. 

We  have  also,  at  some  length,  proved,  that  the  true  doc- 
trine of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  as  taught  us  in  his  word,  is  the 
front-mark,  and  most  essential  characteristic  of  a  true  church. 
That  alone  can  be  a  safe  and  trustworthy  building  of  God, 
which  rests  upon  the  doctrine  of  apostles  and  prophets,  Jesus 
Christ  himself  being  the  chief  corner-stone. 

Now,  by  this  test  in  paiticular,  and  by  each  of  these  tests, 
in  all  their  severity,  we  are  willing,  as  the  presbyterian  church, 
that  our  claims  should  be  tried  ;  and  thus  brought  to  a  comparison 
with  those  of  the  Romish,  the  prelatic,  or  of  any  other  denomi- 
nation. 

Let  Rome  boast  of  her  miracles,  which  are  but  lying  wonders 
wherewith  she  deceiveth  the  simple.  —  Let  her  boast  of  her 
unity,  while  she  is  riven  asunder  by  schisms,  jealousies,  factions 
and  adverse  parties.  Let  her  boast  of  her  sanctity,  while  she  is 
foul  with  the  corrupting  sores  of  infidelity,  immorality,  and  vice. 
Let  her  boast  of  her  antiquity,  while  she  bears  the  marks  of 
novelty  and  of  nullity  in  all  the  dogmas,  that  are  peculiar  to  her. 
Let  her  boast  of  her  apostolic  lineage  and  exclusive  power,  in 
which  she  is  joined  by  the  prelacy,  and  wherein  she  is  a  most 
manifest  usurper  of  a  throne  and  a  dominion,  never  granted  ;  and 
of  which  apostolicity  she  is  a  successor,  neither  by  right  nor  in 
spirit,  nor  in  fitness  for  the  discharge  of  any  of  its  peculiar  offices. 2 
We,  on  the  contrary,  rest  our  claims  to  the  character  of  a  true 
church,  upon  christian  union  with  Christ  our  head,  and  with  his 
body,  the  holy  church  universal  throughout  the  world.  We  will 
boast  of  that  true  apostolicity  and  lineage  divine — that  sacred 
doctrine,  to  establish  which  Christ  poured  out  his  blood  upon 
the  cross,  as  our  substitute  and  sacrifice; — and  for  Avhich  the 
whole  company  of  apostles  and  martyrs  counted  not  their  lives 
dear  to  them,  when  sacrificed  for  this  "  testimony  of  Jesus." 

To  use  the  language  of  John  Leger,  in  his  History  of  one  branch 

1)  That  the  prelatic  succession-      truth,  see   Powell  on  Ap.  Succ.  pp. 
ists   have    been    treacherous  to   the      144,  145,  148. 


LECT.  XXI.]  THE    DOCTRINE    OF    THE   WALDENSES.  545 

of  our  presbyterial  and  apostolic  family,  when  he  thus  nobly 
vindicates  their  claims  :  — 

"  That  man  "  says  he,  "  would  be  undoubtedly  ridiculous,  who 
should  wish  to  persuade  poor  people  that  they  do  not  belong  to 
the  race  of  Adam,  because  it  is  impossible  for  them  to  show  the 
tree  of  their  genealogy,  and  by  their  continual  succession  from 
father  to  son,  that  they  are  really  descended  from  him.  And  if 
from  this  he  should  infer  either  that  they  are  fallen  from  the 
clouds,  or  that  they  are  sprung  up  like  mushrooms  in  a  night, 
or  that  these  are  a  new  race  of  men,  he  would  be  set  down  for 
absurd  more  than  for  subtile.  The  reason  is,  because  learning 
from  the  word  of  God  that  the  whole  human  race  is  "  of  one 
blood,"  and  finding  in  them  as  in  others  the  nature  of  humanity, 
we  boldly  conclude  that  they  must  proceed  from  the  same  stem. 
In  like  manner,  because  the  holy  scriptures  declare  that  the  true 
church  is  the  same  from  the  beginning  of  the  world,  and  that 
all  who  hold  the  true  faith  which  she  teaches,  are  her  legitimate 
children  ;  the  inhabitants  of  the  valleys  invincibly  proving  that 
they  have  always  professed  and  still  profess  the  same  faith,  are 
also  without  contradiction,  the  true  succession  of  the  church,  not 
local  or  personal,  but  of  the  church  of  the  faith  and  sound  doc- 
trine, as  the  Holy  Ghost  teaches  that  Abraham  is  '  the  father  of 
them  that  believe,'  though  they  be  '  not  circumcised.'  And  in 
the  words  of  Jesus,  '  whosoever  shall  do  the  will  of  God,  the 
same  is  my  brother,  and  my  sister,  and  mother.'  And  again, 
'if  ye  were  Abraham's  children,  ye  would  do  the  works  of 
Abraham.'  And  as  Gregory  Nazianzen  declares  in  his  funeral 
oration  over  Athanasius,  '  all  those  who  follow  the  faith  of  Abra- 
ham, are  the  children  of  Abraham.'  " 

"  So  long  as  the  church  of  Rome  retained  the  true  faith,  and 
true  religion  established  by  the  holy  apostles,  without  any  neces- 
sity of  having  recourse  to  the  proof  of  genealogies  and  of  the 
succession  of  families,  their  disciples  and  successors  through  all 
Italy,  nay,  all  the  world,  will  acknowledge  that  each  of  the 
Italian  churches,  as  Turin,  Milan  and  Aquileia,  has  had  from 
thence  the  succession  of  faith  as  well  as  the  Roman  church  has 
had,  and  that  they  all  remain  united  with  Jesus  Christ  their  only 
chief,  and  in  union  with  one  another.  And  so  far  was  it  from 
being  their  duty  to  devise  any  schism  or  separation,  that  the 
very  thought  of  it  would  have  been  criminal." 

It  has  indeed  been  alleged  by  Mr.  Keble,  in  his  work  on  Tra- 
dition, that  while  true  doctrine  is  a  necessary  mark  of  true  apos- 
tolical succession,  that  yet  "the  treasure  of  sound  doctrine  was 
to  be  guarded  bv  the  grace  of  the  apostolic  succession, "i  and  that 
69 


546      THE  PRELATIC    SUCCESSION   BETRAYED    THE    TRUTH.    [LECT.  XXI. 

"  where  the  one,  the  succession  fails,  there,  as  this  verse  (2  Tim. 
i.  14)  would  lead  us  to  expect,  and  all  church  history  proves, 
the  truth  of  doctrine  is  immediately  in  imminent  jeopardy. '"* 
"  We  are  to  look,"  therefore,  he  adds,  "  before  all  things,  to  the 
integrity  of  a  good  deposit,  the  orthodox  faith  ;  "  that  is,  "  the 
creed  of  the  apostolical  church,  guarantied  to  us  by  holy  scrip- 
ture, and  by  consent  of  pure  antiquity." 

Now,  that  "the  treasure  of  sound  doctrine  "has  been  guarded 
by  those  who  have  received,  as  these  divines  imagine,  "the 
grace  of  the  apostolical  succession,"  w'e  most  peremptorily  deny. 
The  apostles  themselves,  until  endowed  with  the  Holy  Spirit, 
and  thus  led  into  all  truth,  would  have  stood  opposed  to  what, 
by  that  guidance,  they  were  led  to  believe  to  be  the  true  doc- 
trine of  Christ  and  of  his  church.  And  it  will  not  be  pretended 
that  this  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Ghost  rests,  and  has  ever  rested, 
upon  all  the  boasted  successors  of  the  apostles.  Was  not  Judas 
one  of  the  twelve,  and  an  apostle  ?  And  Peter  also,  was  not  he 
an  apostle,  when  he  denied  Christ  and  blasphemed,  and  when 
he  violently  resisted,  in  his  blinded  ignorance,  the  necessity  of 
Christ's  sufferings  and  death  ?  Was  he  not  an  apostle,  when 
Paul  withstood  him  to  the  face,  as  teaching  that  which  was  con- 
trary to  sound  doctrine  ?  Do  not  the  apostles  frequently  ad- 
monish us  concerning  some  who  would  arise,  and  who  would 
claim  to  be  apostles,  but  whose  false  doctrines  would  prove  that 
they  "were  not?  "  Were  not  many  of  the  earliest  heretics,  as 
far  as  ecclesiastical  forms  went,  regular  successors  of  the  apos- 
tles? Did  not  many  of  the  very  churches  established  by  the 
apostles  themselves,  and  whose  ministers  were  apostolically  con- 
secrated, become  apostate,  corrupt,  and  deny  the  faith,  and  thus 
hand  down  as  the  apostolic  truth,  the  evil  doctrines  and  com- 
mandments of  men  ?  Did  not  the  early  heretics  generally  rise 
up  in  the  bosom  the  church,  under  the  guardianship  of  this  very 
grace  of  the  succession,  and  in  the  full  enjoyment  of  all  its  trans- 
mitted efficacy  ? 

And  was  there  not  a  time,  when  Athanasius  was  against  the 
whole  world,  in  maintaining  the  doctrines  of  the  gospel,  and 
when  the  "  treasure  of  sound  doctrine"  was  abandoned  by  the 
whole  church,  notwithstanding  this  grace  of  apostolical  succes- 
sion ?  Nay,  what  are  we  to  think  of  the  papacy  itself,  which 
has  been  brought  forth,  cradled,  and  matured,  by  this  very  grace 
of  apostolical  succession  ?  What  are  we  to  think  of  the  universal 
establishment  of  this  antichristian  system,  under  the  guard,  and 
by  the  instrumentality  of  this  grace  of  apostolical  succession,  in 
England  and  in  Ireland,  and  that  for  ages  of  darkness,  impiety, 

1)  Keble  on  Tradit.  p.  42.  2)  Ibid,  p.  44. 


[lECT.  XXI.]   PRELATISTS  HAVE  BETEAYED  THE  TRUTH.       547 

and  crime  ?  What  are  we  to  think  of  the  monstrous  errors,  and 
idolatrous  superstitions,  and  worse  than  heathen  enormities, 
which  have  been  fostered  and  sustained  by  the  guardian  care  of 
this  apostohc  succession  in  the  Greek  and  other  oriental  churches  ? 
With  what  ferocious  zeal  did  this  "  grace  "  contend  against  the 
reformation  of  the  church,  and  consign  to  miserable  agonies  the 
defenders  of  Christ  and  his  gospel  ?  And  with  what  vigilant 
jealousy  for  the  preservation  of  the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus,  did 
this  "  grace  of  the  apostolic  succession"  watch  over  it  in  England, 
during  the  reigns  of  the  Charles's  and  of  the  James's,  and  until 
within  a  very  recent  period  —  when  Arianism,  Socinianism, 
perjury,  infidelity,  and  the  universal  decay  of  moral  virtue,  were 
the  characteristic  traits  of  many  of  these  apostolical  successors ! 

With  what  arrogant  effrontery  does  this  writer  challenge  an 
examination  into  the  merits  of  this  doctrine  of  apostolical  succes- 
sion, on  the  ground  of  its  preservation  of  "the  treasure  of  sound 
doctrine."  llli  robur  et  aes  triplex  circa  pectus  erat.  The  very 
reverse  is  true.  These  apostolical  successors  have  been  many 
of  them  graceless  betrayers  of  their  sacred  trust ; — perverters  of 
the  truth;  —  enemies  of  Christ  by  wicked  works;  —  and  the 
abettors  of  all  that  is  heretical  in  doctrine,  and  immoral  in  practice. 

Are  we  not  now  startled,  as  by  a  midnight  cry  of  fire,  or 
the  sudden  approach  of  an  invading  host,  by  the  fact,  that  while 
these  gracious  apostolical  successors  are  modestly  claiming  for 
themselves  the  exclusive  possession  of  the  Holy  Ghost ;  and  pro- 
fessing their  adherence  to  the  church  of  the  reformation  —  two 
THOUSAND  of  the  clcrgy  in  England  are,  at  this  moment,  com- 
mitted to  a  system  of  doctrine  and  of  practice,  which  in  the 
judgment  of  their  brethren  and  of  the  Romanists  themselves,  is 
in  no  essential  feature  different  from  popery  ?  Most  justly,  there- 
fore, is  this  doctrine  of  prelatical  succession  found  guilty  of  aid- 
ing, assisting,  and  abetting  in  a  conspiracy  against  the  truth  and 
order  of  the  gospel,  in  every  period  of  the  church. 

And  although  we  are  denounced,  by  these  lovers  of  peace,  as 
"communities  which  deny  what  they  believe  to  be  fundamentals 
of  the  gospel  of  Christ ;"  —  although  our  views  are  character- 
ized as  "  the  turbulent  notions  with  which  Calvin  obscured  the 
truth;"  although  the  most  calumnious  vituperation  is  heaped 
upon  the  venerated  names  of  Luther  and  of  Calvin  ;'  —  yet  do 
we  challenge  all  the  world  to  show  that  our  doctrines  and  our 
polity  are  not  according  to  the  pattern  laid  down  for  us  in  the 
word  of  God,  and  the  pure  and  uncorrupt  teachings  of  his  holy 
oracles.  "To  the  law  and  to  the  testimony" — this  is  our 
appeal,  and  by  this  standard  are  we  willing  to  be  adjudged. 

1)  See  Tract,  No.  153,  as  above,  at  pp.  8,  10, 12,  «fec. 


ADDITIONAL  NOTE  TO  LECTURE  TWENTY-FIRST. 


NOTE  A. 

TRUE    DOCTRINE THE     TRUE    SUCCESSION. 

That  the  true  doctrine  is  the  true  mark  of  a  pure  and  safe  church  of  Christ, 
we  will  further  prove  by  some  additional  authorities : 

"  This  hath  ever  been  reckoned  a  most  certain  ground  of  principle  in  relig- 
ion, that  that  church  which  maintaineth  without  error  the  faith  of  Christ, 
which  holdeth  the  true  doctrine  of  the  Gospel  in  matters  necessary  to  salva- 
tion, and  preacheth  the  same,  which  retainetli  the  lawful  use  of  those  sacra- 
ments only  wliich  Christ  hath  appointed,  and  which  appointeth  vice  to  be 
punished,  and  virtue  to  be  maintained, notwithstanding  in  some  other  respects, 
and  in  some  points,  it  have  many  blemishes,  imperfections,  nay,  divers  and 
sundry  errors,  is  yet  to  be  acknowledged  for  the  Mother  of  the  Faithful,  the 
House  of  God,  the  Ark  of  Noah,  the  Pillar  of  Truth,  and  the  Spouse  of  Christ. 
From  which  church  whosoever  doth  separate  himself,  he  is  to  be  reckoned  a 
schismatic  or  an  heretic."  —  Archbp.  Bancroft's  Scrm.  at  Paul's  Cross. 

"To  this  trial  one  will  stand,"  says  Bp.  Bull,  in  his  Vindication  of  the 
Church  of  England,  "  let  that  churcli  that  most  earnestly  presseth  this  real 
piety,  carry  the  bell,  and  be  acknowledged  for  the  best  church." — Oxf.  edn. 
p.  G. 

Bishop  Heber,  in  his  Life  of  Taylor,  (Taylor's  Wks.  vol.  i.  p.  183,)  remarks, 
"  In  the  first  of  these  supposed  consequences,  Taylor  assumes  that  '  the  gov- 
ernment of  the  church  is  in  immediate  order  to  the  good  and  benison  of  souls.' 
But  this  is  plainly  untrue,  since  for  this  great  end  nothing  more  is  immediately 
necessary,  (speaking  always  in  subordination  to  the  merits  and  sacrifices  of 
Christ,)  but  the  sincere  word  of  God,  as  delivered  in  scripture,  to  enlight- 
en and  establish  our  faith,  and  the  means  of  grace,  which  are  aftorded  us  in 
baptism  and  the  Lord's  supper.  Tlic  government  of  the  church  is  in  immedi- 
ate order  to  the  faithful  preaching  of  the  truth  and  the  decent  and  orderly 
ministration  of  the  sacraments,  but  it  is  only  through  their  means,  and  as  a 
consequence  of  them,  that  it  seeks  the  salvation  of  souls.  It  must  rank, 
therefore,  as  Hooker  wisely  teaches,  not  among  the  points  essential  to  salva- 
tion, but,  '  those  things  that  are  accessary  hereunto,  those  tilings  that  so  be- 
long to  the  way  of  salvation,  as  to  alter  them,  is  no  otherwise  to  change  that 
way  than  a  path  is  changed  by  altering  only  the  uppermost  face  thereof, 
which,  be  it  laid  with  gravel,  or  set  with  grass,  or  paved  with  stones,  remain- 
eth  still  the  same  path.'  Archbishop  VVhitgift  himself  speaks  of 'the  doc- 
trine established  in  the  churches  of  England,  which  is  the  main  note  of  the 
churches.'  "  (Stype's  Whitgift,  i.  248,  in  Price's  Hist.  Prot.  Nonconf.  vol.  i.  p. 
333) 

Dr.  Barrow,  on  the  Unity  of  the  Cliurch,  shows  at  length,  that  depar- 
ture from  the  faith,  ipso /acio,  cuts  off  from  the  Catholic  church.  (VVks. 
vol.  i.  p.  763.)  See  the  testimonies  of  tlie  English  martyrs,  Philpot,  Bradford, 
in  Fo.x  and  Willet,  p.  83,  Syn.  Pap.  See  the  testimonies  of  Huss,  Barnard, 
Lambert,  the  forged  Clementine  Epistle,  Pope  Felix,  and  Petrum  Antioch. 
Symmachus  Decret.  p.  i.  Barlaani,  lib  de  princep.  c.  xiii.  &c.  in  Dr.  Willet  on 


NOTE    TO    LECTURE    XXI.  549 

Syn.  Pap.  p.  167,  168,  and  others  again  at  p.  83,  where  there  are  many.  For 
this  article,  among  others,  Huss  died,  that  the  Pope  was  not  a  true  successor  of, 
but  contrary  in  doctrine  and  life  to,  the  apostles.    (Ibid.) 

"  When  the  Apostles  were  removed,  their  writings  were  put  in  their  place. 
The  New  Testament  succeeded  to  the  Apostolic  administration."  (Dr.  Rice 
in  Evang.  Mag.  vol.  ix.  p.  551.) 

"  The  case,"  ( ibid,  p.  552,)  he  adds,  "  of  ordinary  ministers  of  the  gospel  is 
very  diiferent.  They  bring  no  new  terms,  they  reveal  no  truths  unknown  be- 
fore, they  make  no  new  discoveries  in  religion.  But  their  simple  business  as 
preachers  is,  to  assist  their  fellow-men  in  understanding  the  terms  of  salva- 
tion, and  to  persuade  all  men  to  embrace  them  as  they  are  revealed  in  the 
gospel.  —  The  whole  authority  is  lodged  in  the  gosjjd  as  a  revelation  of  the  will 
of  God;  and  not  an  atom  of  it  is  in  man." 

He  then  goes  on  to  exhibit  in  contrast  the  presbyterian  and  the  prelatic 
doctrine. 

Reviewer.—  "  Having  been  appoint-  Bishop.  —  <•  I,  the  authorized  acrent 

ed  a  teacher  in  the  church  of  Christ,  of  heaven,  the  substitute  for  the  per- 

1  do  declare  unto  you  that  such  and  son  of  Christ   on   earth,  do    declare 

such   are  the  doctrines  of  Christ,  as  that  the  will  of  God  is  so  and  so;  and 

revealed  in  the  Bible.     Believe  them,  by    the  authority    vested    in    me,   I 

not   because  of  my  word,  but    because  pledge  the  God  of  truth  to  fulfil  these 

they  are  the  doctrines  of  Christ.     It  is  promises  of  his  woid.     This  is  a  pe- 

this  which  gives  them  their  whole  au-  culiar  power  vested  in   me,  and  in  all 

thority  to  bind  your  consciences,  and  my   brethren,  with   which   no   other 

regulate  your  faith.     The  authority,  I  men  on  the    earth   are   clothed.     If, 

repeat,  is  not  in  the  man  but  in  the  therefore,  you    would    escape    perdi- 

word.     I  speak  as  unto  wise  men  —  tion,  and  cherish  an  authorized  hope 

search  the  scriptures,  and  judge  ye  of  heaven,  receive  the  truth  as  I  de- 

what  I  say."  liver  it  to  you." 

"The  unity  of  the  church,  then,  let  all  bishops  know,  consists  essentially 
in  that  which  constitutes  hor  identity,  unity  of  doctrine  in  matters  ne- 
CESS.4RY  TO  SALVATION  "  (  Dr.  Rice  in  Evanir.  and  Lit.  Mag.  vol.  ix.  p.  .529.)  Af- 
ter giving  a  short  summary  of  fundamental'doctrines,  he  "adds,  (ibid  p.  530,) 
"  We  believe  that  all  who,  with  the  whole  heart,  receive  these  doctrines,  are 
united  to  Christ,  and  belong  to  that  one  body,  of  which  he  is  the  Head  and 
Kmg;  that  they  are  bound  to  recognize  each  other  as  brethren,  and  hold  com- 
munion as  disciples  of  a  common  Lord ;  and  that  any  who  reject  from  the 
fellowship  of  saints,  those  who  receive  and  live  by  these  truths,  are  schismati- 
cal  and  contentious,  laying  a  stress  on  outward  things,  which  Jesus  Christ 
has  not  laid,  and  thus  deeply  injuring  the  true  interests  of  the  Church  which 
he  has  purchased  with  his  blood.  Here  are  the  principles  on  which  we  are 
willing  to  hold  communion  with  Episcopalians,  Methodists,  Baptists,  Congre- 
gatiunahsts,  or  christians  of  any  outward  form  whatever." 

That  truth  of  doctrine  is  the  only  sure  and  infallible  mark  of  the  church  of 
Christ,  see  asserted  also  by  Dr.  Freeman,  in  Notes  of  the  Ch.  Ex'd.  and 
Refuted,  pp.  69,  71,  75;  Dr.  Payne,  in  Notes  of  Ch.  pp.  150,  155,  156;  Dr. 
Claggett  do.  pp.  170,  IPO,  190,  194;  Bishop  Fowler  in  do.  pp  111,  121  ;  Dr. 
Resbury  m  do.  p.  2b3  ;  Dr.  Scott  in  do.  pp.  198,  209;  Bishop  WiHiams  in  do. 
pp.  103,  121 ;  Bishop  Sherlock  pp.  2,  6,  10,  16,  29,  34,  35.  40,  41,  44;  Bishop 
Patrick  p.  89.  See  authorities  quoted  in  Willet  Syn.  Pap.  p.  m;  Stillino-- 
fleet  s  Irenic.  pp.  114,  4to,  ed.  2nd,  1662;  Storr  and  Flatt's  Bibl.  Tlieol.  p.  501, 
sect,  cvi;  De  Moor  Comment  in  Marckii,  vol.  vi.  sect.  ii.  p.  54;  Turretini 
Opera,  tom.  lii.  p.  121,  and  tom  iv.  De  Secessione,  p.  316;  Rutherford's  Due 
Right  of  Presb.  p.  286;  Limborch's  Body  of  Div.  B,  in  ch.  iv.  vol.  ii.  p.  946. 


CONCLUSION. 


We  have  now  brought  this  examination  of  the  prelatic  doc- 
trine of  apostoHcal  succession  to  a  close.  We  have  endeavored 
fairly,  fully,  frequently,  and  in  the  language  of  many  of  its  most 
received  advocates,  to  state  the  doctrine  in  question,  with  the 
several  claims  and  consequences  inseparable  from  it.  To  many 
we  may  have  appeared  needlessly  circumstantial  and  prolix. 
But  the  developements  which  are  daily  made  of  the  prevalence  of 
these  views,  even  among  the  laity,  and  of  their  open  avowal  and 
defence  by  a  numerous  and  increasing  body  of  the  clergy,  will, 
we  believe,  fully  justify  the  extended  investigation  which  has 
been  made  of  this  important  subject.  As  it  is,  we  have  left  many 
points  unnoticed,  to  which  our  attention  has  been  directed,  and 
many  materials  untouched,  with  which  our  argument  might 
have  been  greatly  enlarged  in  its  dimensions. 

For  all  the  reasons  which  have  been  brought  forward  in  the 
course  of  this  discussion,  the  conclusion  of  the  whole  matter  is, 
that  the  assumed  exclusive  prerogatives,  to  which  the  prelacy 
lays  claim,  upon  the  strength  of  its  apostolical  succession,  are 
baseless,  without  any  honest  credentials  whatever,  and  altogether 
unworthy  of  our  regard.^ 

1)  '•'  We  have  seen,"  says  the  Mag.  vol.  ix.  p.  534,)  "  about  the  vir- 
Hon.  and  Rev.  Baptist  Noel,  in  his  tue  of  what  is  called  apostolical  sue- 
First  Five  Centuries  of  the  Church,  cession.  For  the  life  of  us,  we  never 
(or,  the  Early  Fathers  no  Safe  could  get  down  to  the  meaning  of 
Guides,  Lond.  1839,  p.  31,)  "  that  the  this  thing  ;  but  we  are  perfectly  sure, 
unscriptural  exaltation  of  the  clergy  that  it  has  no  efficacy  in  this  most  im- 
laid  the  foundation  for  all  the  other  portant  part  of  a  minister's  office, 
abuses  which  crept  into  the  church  ;  Undeniable  facts  affisrd  most  decisive 
almost  all  the  false  doctrines  and  evidence,  that  there  is  no  stream  of 
senseless  ceremonies,  which  then  wisdom  or  knowledge  running 
disfigured  it,  being  introduced  by  through  the  succession,  and  pouring 
them."  out  its  rills,  through  episcopal  fingers, 
"  We  have  read  and  heard  a  great  into  those  on  whom  bishops  lay  their 
deal,"  says  Dr.  Rice,  (Evang.  and  Lit.  hands;"    nor  is  this  denied   to   any 


552  RECAPITULATION    OF    THE   ARGUMENTS.  [CONCLD. 

This  doctrine,  upon  which,  as  a  foundation,  the  whole  system 
of  the  prelacy  rests,  has  been  found  utterly  wanting,  when 
weighed  in  any  one  of  the  balances  provided.  The  tests  laid 
down  by  the  authority  of  its  advocates,  can  be  met  in  reference 
to  no  one  link  in  the  entire  chain  of  this  boasted  succession, 
from  St.  Peter  to  the  present  time.  Its  historic  evidences  are 
found  to  be  in  no  better  preservation,  nor  of  any  greater  strength, 
than  the  relics  of  its  mouldering  abbeys,  whose  name,  date,  and 
origin,  have  sunk  beneath  their  accumulated  ruins.  This  doc- 
trine, which,  like  a  proud,  triumphal  arch,  was  to  span  the  earth 
and  climb  the  heavens,  depends  for  its  support  upon  the  undoubt- 
ed certainty  of  myriad  millions  of  probabilities,  any  one  of  which 
might  fail,  and  by  the  failure  of  which,  its  instantaneous  demoli- 
tion was  inevitable. 

These  prelatical  successors  sue  in  the  court  of  law,  for  the 
entire  and  exclusive  possession  of  a  divine  inheritance,  by  a 
grant  of  primogeniture,  and  in  defeasance  of  all  other  claims. 
But  when  we  demand  the  exhibition  of  their  patent  and  charter, 
that  we  may  there  see  the  exact  boundaries  of  their  grant ;  — 
the  charter  itself  is  wanting ;  the  boundaries  cannot  possibly  be 
traced  in  any  extant  record  ;  nor  can  it  be  even  shown  that  the 
estate  itself  has  been  in  perpetual  possession  of  this  boasted 
ancestry. 

We  ask  for  the  signs  of  an  apostle,  the  title,  the  offices,  the 
gifts,  the  duties;  but  these  successors  have  them  not.  There  is 
in  fact,  nothing  characteristic  of  an  apostle,  as  such,  to  be  found 
about  either  them,  or  their  office,  except  the  assumption  of  an 
authority  which  is  supported  only  by  empty  claims.  They 
are  apostles,  and  apostolical,  by  virtue  of  a  descent  in  which  all 
apostolic  qualifications  are  utterly  lost ;  and  "  they  are  canoni- 
cally  appointed  to  govern,"  while  in  the  appointment  of  many 
of  them,  every  canon,  human  and  divine,  has  been  notoriously 
broken.  And  this  succession  secures  the  power  of  transmitting 
divine  virtues,  and  the  plenitude  of  grace,  though  the  giver  may 
have  been  an  atheist,  a  murderer,  and  every  thing  that  was  sel- 
fish, carnal,  and  devilish  ;  and  although  the  receiver  may  have 
waxed  worse  and  worse,  in  imitation  of  his  apostolic  predeces- 
sors. More  palpable,  and  therefore  less  preposterous,  is  the 
system  of  the  Calmuck  Tartars,  whose  successive  priests  drink, 

because    he  was  not   episcopally   or-  is  nothing,  frw^A  is  everything:  it  is 

dained.      Where,    in   the  New   Tes-  by  the  truth  we  are  sanctified  ;  by  the 

tament,  is  any  thing  to  warrant  such  truth  we  are  made  free ;  by  the  word 

opinions  as  these  ?    In  the  rule  given  of  God  we  are  begotten  to  a  lively 

us     by    our    blessed    Saviour,  form  hope." 


CONCLU.]  RECAPITULATION    OF   THE   ARGUMENTS.  553 

each  in  turn,  a  cup  wherein  are  mingled  the  ashes  of  his  pre- 
decessor.'" 

Trace  this  doctrine  in  its  course  through  history,  and  that 
course  is  readily  distinguished  by  the  unwashed  marks  of  blood, 
and  the  unburied  bones  which  lie  bleaching  in  the  sunshine  and 
the  storm,  and  which  still  cry  aloud  for  vengeance.  The  full 
ascendancy  of  this  system  can  only  be  gained  by  the  prostration 
of  civil  and  religious  liberty.  The  tiger  may  be  chained,  starv- 
ed, subdued,  and  made  to  obey  his  keeper,  but  he  is  a  tiger 
still,  and  only  waits  the  taste  of  blood  to  whet  his  appetite  for 
more. 

But  this  doctrine  is  as  useless,  as  it  is  unreasonable  and  intol- 
erant. It  is  a  good  way  to  try  the  validity  of  any  general  prin- 
ciple, to  push  it  to  its  extremest  length,  and  thus  prove  whether 
or  not  it  is  of  universal  application.  Now  here  is  an  axiom, 
that  out  of  that  church,  which  possesses  this  apostolical  suces- 
sion,  there  is  no  covenanted  salvation  ;  no  saving  efficacy,  or 
divine  authority.  It  follows,  therefore,  that  there  is  not  now,  in 
all  Christendom  besides,  any  genuine  piety,  or  any  efficacious 
ministry,  or  any  sanctifying  ordinances.  It  follows,  also,  that 
there  never  has  been  any  such,  in  the  ages  that  are  past ;  and 
that  there  never  will  be  any  in  the  ages  that  are  to  come.  Now 
a  doctrine  which  is  at  once  reducible  to  such  an  infinite  and  pal- 
pable absurdity,  must  be  false,  even  should  we  not  be  able  to 
detect  the  fallacy.  Just  as  the  doctrine  of  the  infinite  divisibil- 
ity of  matter,  however  seemingly  it  may  be  demonstrated  on 
paper,  is  repudiated  by  an  appeal  to  actual  experiment  and  fact, 
and  by  thus  bringing  it  to  an  application  to  the  concrete  sub- 
stance. So  is  it  here.  Let  us  bring  out  this  doctrine,  from  its 
obscurity,  as  it  is  concealed  in  ecclesiastical  canons,  and  apply 
it  to  the  actual  manifestations  of  divine  grace  ;  and  it  receives 
an  instantaneous  condemnation,  as  a  bold  denial  of  the  work  and 
grace,  and  free  mercy  of  God.^ 

But  this  anathematizing  condemnation  of  the  Christianity  of 
millions,  flows  necessarily  from  this  doctrine,  of  which  it  is  the 
essence  that  he,  who  disbelieves  it,  is  an  infidel,  as  to  the  "sub- 
stance of  the  faith."  God,  therefore,  in  the  working  of  his 
grace,  sets  to  his  seal,  that  this  doctrine  is  utterly  untrue.  Nor 
will  it  do  to  reply,  that  even  among  those  who  deny  other  doc- 
trines which  are  held  to  be  fundamental,  there  are  yet  many  who 
are,  apparently,  christian  and  devoted.  For,  even  granting  this 
to  be  the  case,   we  know  not  but  that  in  such  cases,  the  truth 

1)    See  Ely's   Call   to  Hear  the  2)   See   Spiritual  Despotism,  p. 

Church  Examined,  p.  12.  405. 

70 


554  GOD    OPENLY   FALSIFIES   THIS   DOCTRINE.  [CGNCLIT. 

may  have  been  conveyed  to  the  mind,  while  such  individuals 
were,  nevertheless,  blinded  to  its  actual  perception  in  its  distinct 
and  explicit  form.  Neither  do  we  dare  to  set  limits  to  the  stream 
of  God's  saving  mercy,  or  arrogantly  say,  thus  far  shalt  thou  go 
and  no  further.  But  here  we  have  a  very  different  case.  Here 
we  have  a  defined  boundary,  a  walled  city,  an  embanked  chan- 
nel ;  within  which,  alone,  the  promised  blessings  of  heaven 
can  be  found,  whatever  a  man  may  believe.  And  yet  beyond 
them  all,  and  in  most  copious  abundance,  the  dew  of  divine 
mercy  distils  upon  the  rejoicing  hearts  of  God's  regenerated 
children.  Thus  are  we  assured,  by  God  himself,  that  this  doc- 
trine, "  whosoever  he  be  that  giveth  this  counsel,  shall,  before 
God,  be  able  to  do  us  no  more  profit  than  the  fig  leaves  did 
unto  Adam."^ 

That  this  appeal  to  the  fruits  of  our  ministrations,  as  the  test 
of  the  quality  of  the  tree  itself,  is  a  fair  one,  we  learn  not  only 
from  our  opponents  themselves,  but  also  from  the  sure  word  of 
God,  where  a  false  ministry  is  threatened  with  barrenness  ;  (Jer. 
xxiii.  32 ;)  and  where  we  hear  even  an  apostle,  by  this  very  evi- 
dence, attesting  the  lawfulness  of  his  ministry.  (1  Cor.  ix.  1,  2.) 
Even  in  the  days  of  former  generations,  our  non-conformist  fath- 
ers could  exhibit  the  proofs  of  their  heavenly  calling  in  many 
thousands  of  souls  converted  by  a  heavenly  agency,  and  could 
retort  on  those  who  bitterly  maligned  them,  what  we  may  ap- 
ply to  many  who  have,  in  like  manner,  gone  out  from  us,  and 
turned  upon  us  w'ith  tongues  of  bitterness  and  malice. 

"  There  are  many  that  cry  down  our  ministry,  and  separate 
from  us  as  no  ministers,  that  cannot  deny  but  that  they  had 
THEIR  conversion  FROM  US.  And  if  our  ministry  be  antichris- 
tian,  how  is  their  conversion  christian?  "* 

But  there  is  one  argument  by  which  we  are  assailed,  and  which 
is  believed  to  be  of  itself  sufficient  to  overwhelm  and  confound  us. 
This  is  the  acknowledged  antiquity,  and  the  very  early  prevalence, 
of  the  system  of  prelacy.  Now  that  this  system  is  ancient,  we 
believe  ;  but  that  it  is  apostolical,  we  deny ;  and  from  this  very 
plea  of  hoary  age,  do  we  deduce  an  argument  by  which  to  blunt 
the  edge  of  this  keen  weapon,  if  it  will  not  rather  turn  it  in  re- 
sistless power  against  the  arm  that  wields  it.  By  this  very  an- 
tiquity of  prelacy,  would  we  prove  that  it  is  apocryphal,  and  not 
canonical  —  apostatical,  and  not  apostolical  —  ecclesiastical,  and 
not  divine. 

The  apostles  themselves  admonish  us,  that  there  would  arise 

])  Hooper  in  Letters  of  the  Mar-  2)  Div.  Right  of  the  Ministry,  pt. 

tyrs,  p.  95.  2d,  p.  30.     See  also  Calamy's  Def.  of 

Nonconf.  vol.  i.  pp.  216,  217. 


CONCLTJ.]  THIS    SYSTEM  FOREDOOMED   BY    GOD's   WORD.  555 

those  who  would  lay  claim  to  a  supernatural  investment  with 
apostolic  power  —  who  would  sit  in  the  temple  of  God,  which 
is  the  church,  and  there  exalt  themselves  to  the  throne  of  su- 
premacy —  who  would  claim  for  their  decrees,  canons,  and  bur- 
densome impositions,  that  reverence  which  is  due  only  to  the 
laws  of  God  —  who  would  thus  legislate  as  if  above  all  law,  and 
as  the  makers  of  law  for  others  —  who  would  in  this  way  shut 
the  kingdom  of  heaven  against  all  who  should  resistor  oppose  — 
and  who,  arrogating  to  themselves  divine  authority,  would  trace 
up  their  pedigree  to  the  apostles  themselves.  This  mysteri- 
ous (or  then  concealed)  wickedness,  is,  says  the  apostle  Paul, 
already  at  ivork,  and  only  waits  till  the  restraining  power  be 
withdrawn,  fully  to  develope  itself. 

Now  that  these  predictive  warnings  of  the  apostles,  insisted 
upon  with  frequent  solemnity,  apply  to  the  system  of  the  papacy, 
all  are  agreed.  They  refer  not,  however,  to  that  system,  as  ac- 
cidentally associated  with  the  church  of  Rome ;  nor  to  that 
church  exclusively ;  but  they  refer  to  those  principles  which 
have  been  more  or  less  developed  in  the  Greek  and  other 
churches ;  and  which  we  therefore  distinguish  by  the  term  prel- 
acy, as  applicable  equally  to  them  all.  The  papacy,  however, 
did  not  originate  —  it  only  carried  out  these  principles  to  their  ex- 
treme, though  legitimate  consequences.  The  principles  them- 
selves were  clearly,  and  to  a  great  extent  practically,  developed 
in  the  Nicene  age  ;  which  is,  as  prelatists  teach  us,  the  very  im- 
bodiment  of  their  views  and  principles,  and  the  standard  of  their 
imitation.  The  forewarning  of  the  apostle  must,  therefore,  be 
applicable  to  this  age,  since  the  system  had  commenced  its  op- 
eration even  in  the  apostles'  days,  and  stealthily  advanced  until 
it  was  finally  consummated  in  the  superstitions  and  corruptions 
of  a  later  period. 

That  the  prelacy,  as  now  developed  by  the  Oxford  divines, 
and  attributed  by  them  to  the  English  church,  comes  strictly 
under  the  denunciations  of  the  apostles,  is  fully  argued  by  the 
author  of  "  Ancient  Christianity,"  and  "  Spiritual  Despotism," 
who  is  himself  a  member  of  that  church,  and  a  friend  to  what  he 
believes  to  be  the  primitive  episcopacy.^  "  If  Jerome  and  oth- 
ers," says  the  learned  Musculus,  "  had  seen  as  much  as  they  « 
that  came  after,  they  would  have  concluded  that "  this  office  of 
prelate  "  was  never  brought  in  by  God's  spirit,  to  take  away 
schisms,  as  was  pretended  ;  but  was  brought  in  by  Satan  to 
waste  and  destroy  the  former  ministry  that  fed  the  flock. "^     So 

1)  See  Spirt.  Despot,  p.  337 ;  An-  2)  See  in  Div.  Right  of  the  Min. 

cient  Christianity,  passim.  pt.  ii.  p.  118. 


556  THIS    SYSTEM   THE   FORETOLD    CORRUPTION.  [CONCLTT. 

also  teaches  Sadeel.i  Dr.  Whitaker  also  says,  that  "many  holy 
and  wise  men  have  judged  it  (prelacy)  more  pernicious  than  the 
disease  itself,  (schism  ;)  and  although  it  did  not  by  and  by  appear, 
yet  miserable  experience  afterwards  showed  it.  First,  ambition 
crept  in,  which  at  length  begat  antichrist,  set  him  in  his  chair, 
and  brought  the  yoke  of  bondage  upon  the  neck  of  the  church."* 

The  very  certainty,  therefore,  of  the  early  prevalence  of  this 
system  in  its  essential  principles,  instead  of  constituting  an  infal- 
lible demonstration  of  its  apostolicity,  may,  on  the  contrary, 
identify  it  with  that  corrupt  and  antichristian  system,  of  whose 
insnaring  power  these  inspired  apdstles  have  so  pointedly  admon- 
ished us.  And  the  very  plea  which  is  so  continually  offered,  of 
the  undeniable  antiquity  of  prelacy,  is  only  a  surer  mark,  in  con- 
nexion with  other  circumstantial  evidence,  of  its  connexion  with 
that  corrupt  apostacy  from  primitive  truth  and  order,  and  a  loud 
warning  to  us  all,  not  to  be  deceived  by  lying  wonders  of  men, 
or  by  their  endless  genealogies ;  or  by  any  traditions  received  from 
the  fathers  ;  but  to  make  our  appeal  to  the  law  and  to  the  testi- 
mony, as  the  only  infallible  rule  of  either  faith  or  practice. 

The  true  and  only  church  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  is  to  be 
found,  according  to  this  prelatic  theory,  in  that  order  of  prelates, 
who,  in  linked  brotherhood,  extend  in  a  long  array  of  brighten- 
ing succession,  to  the  very  throne  of  the  apostles.  This  is  the 
fact  for  which  is  claimed  the  seal  of  historic  testimony. 

Now  let  any  one  who  desires  to  bring  this  matter  to  a  very 
palpable  issue,  either  trace  in  the  actual  perusal  of  some  impartial 
record,  or  if  this  has  been  already  accomplished,  then  let  him  re- 
view in  imagination,  the  successive  individuals,  who  constitute  by 
their  summation,  this  entire  prelatical  succession.  Let  him, 
without  exaggeration,  but  with  a  severe  fidelity,  recall  the  vari- 
ous scenes  which  have  been  enacted  through  their  agency,  and 
by  their  authority,  in  the  exercise  of  that  plenary  power  to  which 
they  make  such  ample  pretensions.  Let  Ireland  present  to  the 
view  of  such  an  inquirer,  those  seasons  of  blood,  treachery  and 
death,  when  her  ministers  were  silenced  and  imprisoned  ;  her 
churches  closed  and  her  ordinances  prohibited  ;  and  when  the 
blood  of  her  martyred  thousands  stained  many  a  gory  field  and 
desert  moss.  Let  Scotland  unroll  the  page  of  her  history,  and 
reveal  those  tragedies  of  guilt  and  death,  which,  under  the  pat- 
ronage of  these  apostolical  successors,  have  from  time  to  time 
filled  her  land  with  groans,  and  tears,  and  lamentations.  Let 
England  present  to  view  her  two  thousand  ejected  ministers,  as 
they  wandered  about  in  pining  hunger,  poverty,  and  wretched- 

1)  Ibid,  p.  119.  2)  See  also  Nazianzen,  in  ibid,  p.  119. 


CONCLU.]        THIS   SUCCESSION   BROUGHT   TO   A   PLAIN   TEST.  557 

ness,  or  sunk  to  death  in  damp  and  dreary  prisons  —  while  their 
deserted  flocks  were  famished  by  the  wasting  destitution  of 
God's  word  and  ordinances,  in  their  heart-felt  purity.  Let  the 
mass  of  her  reviled,  abused,  and  calumniated  Puritans,  together 
with  the  blessed  company  of  martyrs,  who  have  lighted  up  the 
fires  of  Smithfield,  or  hung,  felon-like,  on  Tyburn,  pass  in  re- 
view before  him.  Let  France  then  take  up  the  lengthening 
story,  and  tell  how,  on  one  single  occasion,  as  an  exemplification 
of  many,  the  streets  of  every  city  throughout  that  extensive 
kingdom,  flowed  with  the  blood  of  slaughtered  thousands,  while 
paeans  of  victory  were  ascending  to  heaven  from  altars  at  which 
ministered  the  ghostly  successors  of  apostles,  who  rejoiced  to 
give  absolution  and  reward  to  the  fiendish  actors  in  these  scenes 
of  butchery  and  murder.*  Let  every  nation  in  Europe,  yea,  and 
throughout  the  world,  where  these  spiritual  despots  have  estab- 
lished their  dominion  in  the  full  plenitude  of  unrestricted  power, 
again  give  up  the  dead  that  are  in  them  ;  unbar  their  inquisitorial 
gates ;  open  their  prison  cells,  and  break  down  those  hollow 
walls,  within  which  have  mouldered  the  bones  of  incarcerated 
victims.  Let  every  Alpine  summit,  in  whose  rifled  chasms,  and 
underneath  whose  fallen  glaciers,  the  noble  army  of  primitive 
martyrs,  the  men,  women,  and  children,  who  loved  the  truth 
dearer  than  life,  and  who  gladly  chose  death  with  liberty,  rather 
than  life  with  spiritual  slavery  and  a  corrupted  faith  ;  —  let  these, 
and  all  other  similar  and  innumerable  horrors,  which  such  a  re- 
view must  bring  before  him,  display  to  such  an  inquirer  the  work- 
ings of  a  system  originated,  perfected,  and  administered,  by  these 
successors  of  the  apostles. 

On  any  impressible  mind,  what  must  be  the  result  of  such  an 
appeal  to  historic  testimony,  as  to  the  character  and  tendency  of 
this  prelatical  succession?  Would  it  not,  to  such  an  one,  appear 
blasphemous  against  the  honor  of  God  and  of  his  truth,  and  sub- 
versive of  every  principle  of  reason,  to  admit  that  these  men  were 
the  favorites  and  counsellors  of  Heaven?  —  that  to  these  were 
exclusively  given  all  heavenly  gifts  and  graces?  —  that  on  these 
was  exclusively  poured  out  the  influences  of  the  divine  spirit?  — 
and  that  from  these  alone  flowed  those  streams,  whose  living  wa- 
ters were  for  the  healing  of  the  nations  ?     Grant  that  all  who 

1)  In  one  of  his  most  eloquent  most  meritorious  act  of  your  reign, 

orations,  Bossuet  thus  eulogizes  the  King  of  Heaven  !  preserve  the  king 

persecuting   spirit   of  Chancellor  Le  of  the  earth!     It  is  the  ardent  desire 

Tellier,  who  closed  his  career  by  sign-  of  the  church,  it  is  the  ardent  desire  of 

ing  the  fatal  revocation  :  "  You  have,"  the  assernbly  of  Iter  pastors  and  of  her 

says  this  renowned  prelate,"  strength-  bishops."     Bossuet's  Orations,  Lond. 

ened  the  faith;  you  have  extermi-  1801,  p.  147. 
nated    the   heretics:    it   la  the 


558         PRELACY  REPROBATED,  AND  PRESBYTERY  JUSTIFIED.    [CONCLU. 

make  up  this  long  succession  were  not  of  the  character  here  de- 
s'jribed  ;  yet  were  there  not  enough  of  such  a  character,  and  im- 
plicated in  such  inhuman  and  unparalleled  atrocities,  even  over- 
looking the  impurity  of  their  personal  character,  to  stamp  with 
utter  reprobation  a  theory  which  would  appropriate  to  them,  as 
the  depositaries  of  Heaven's  grace,  the  instrumental  power  of 
alone  communicating  eternal  life  ?  Grant  that  similar  charges 
may,  in  many  cases,  be  justly  thrown  back  upon  other  denom- 
inations, as  upon  our  own.  When  we  or  they  assert  any  similar 
and  exclusive  right  to  the  powers  of  the  world  to  come,  by  virtue 
of  some  mysterious  grace  transmitted  though  some  unbroken 
line  of  personal  successors  to  the  apostles,  then  let  such  charges 
be  produced  ;  and  let  them  consume,  as  with  the  lightning's 
flame,  such  baseless  arrogance.  We  rejoice  to  know  that  against 
all  such  intolerant  and  preposterous  assumptions,  there  would 
be,  on  the  part  of  all  protestant  denominations,  one  universal 
burst  of  indignation.  And  what  we  have  to  regret  is,  that  while 
all  parties  in  time  past  have  been  found  criminated  by  their  sanc- 
tion of  unchristian  tenets,  there  should  be  any  now  found  cling- 
ing tenaciously  to  principles  which,  by  their  necessary  working, 
have  sodden  the  path  of  Christianity  with  the  tears  and  blood  of 
Christ's  truest  followers,  the  true  successors  to  the  faith  and  fel- 
lowship of  apostles  and  martyrs. 


INDEX. 


[N.  B. — Many  references  not  deemed  necessary,  are  omitted.] 


Acetius,  referred  to,  172. 

Acton,  Rev.  Henry,  quoted,  xiii. 

Address  to  the  Episcopalians  of  Vir- 
ginia, quoted,  220. 

Admonition  to  Parliament,  quoted, 497. 

Albigenses,  their  testimony,  205. 

Allen,  Rev.  Benjamin,  quoted,  345, 
412,  442. 

Alsop,  Vincent,  quoted,  455, 

Ambrose  on  Bishops  as  Apostles,  234, 
304  ;  quoted  also,  539. 

American  succession  doubtful,  218, 
&c.. ;  opposed,  508.  509. 

American  Whig,  quoted,  509. 

American  churches  —  grossly  misrep- 
resented, 309,  310,  324,  448,  ifcc. 

Ancient  Things  of  the  Catholic 
Church,  quoted,  941. 

Ancient  Christianity,  by  Isaac  Taylor, 
Esq.  quoted  in  the  Eng.  edit.  vol.  i. 
16,  18,  47,  58,  59,  60,  66,  74,  78,  79, 
87,  91,  1.34,  142,  169,  172,  206,  308 ; 
vol.  ii.  2.58,  305. 

Andrews,  Bishop,  quoted,  392. 

Anderson's  Defence  of  Presbyterian- 
ism,  quoted,  150,  210. 

Anglican  succession,  the,  defective, 
200,  &c. ;  can  only  be  traced  up  to 
Henry  VIII.,  209;  a  separation, 
217  ;  and  secession,  365,  «fcc. 

Antichrislian,  the  Romish  church  has 
ever  been  so  regarded,  204,  208. 

Antiquity  of  prelacy,  554 — 556. 

Apostle,  different  meanings  of  the 
word,  236,  238,  255  ;  different  theo- 
ries about,  149,  150  ;  when  the  title 
was  given  to  bishops,  234,  &c. ; 
their  call,  239;  their  endowments, 
239,  242;  their  office,  242,  246; 
had  no  successors,  243,  244,  251, 
252;  duties  of,  247. 

Apostolical  succession,  what  it  implies 


as  prelatists  teach,  3,  7,  38,  39,  52, 
53,  183,  195,  230,  262,  «fcc.;  as 
Romanists  teach,  231. 

Apostolical  succession,  doctrine  of, 
see  stated,  75;  see  question. 

Apostolical  succession,  the  true,  claim- 
ed by  Presbyterians,  43. 

Archer's  Lectures  on  Puseyism,  quot- 
ed, 132,  162,  201. 

Articles  of  the  Church  of  England, 
quoted,  63,  115,  492, 498;  reqdire 
tiie  recognition  of  the  ministers  of 
otiier  churclies,  498. 

Assert,  what  we,  Introd.  §.  v,  page 
xxvi. 

Athanasius,  quoted,  81,  102,  301,  304. 
537. 

Augusti,  quoted,  233. 

Augustine,  quoted,  20,  82,  102,  173, 
236,304,414,518,538. 

Authority,  unlawful,  we  are  naturally 
disposed  to  resist,  33. 

Ayton's  Original  Constitution  of  the 
Church,  quoted,  79,  149,  165,  253, 
447. 

B. 

Bacon,  Lord,  quoted,  409,  472. 

Baltimore  Literary  and  Relig.  Maga- 
zine, quoted,  126,  456. 

Bancroft,  Hist,  of  U.  States,  quoted, 
321,  330. 

Bancroft,  Archbishop,  quoted,  450, 547. 

Baptism  necessary  to  ordination,  120. 

Bangs,  Dr.,  his  Original  Church  of 
Christ,  quoted,  361. 

Baptists,  bigotry  of  prelatists  towards, 
26. 

Baptist  Recorder,  quoted,  347, 

Baronius,on  the  character  of  the  Popes, 
199,  226,  227. 

Barrick,  Rev.  Edward,  of  Trinity  Col- 
lege, Dublin,  quoted,  24. 


560 


INDEX. 


Barrow,  Dr.  Isaac,  on  the  Apostolical 

Office,    238,   239,   246,  253;     also 

quoted,  69,  122,  186,  205,  429,  433, 

435,  481 . 
Basil,  quoted,  81,  304. 
Baxter,  his   True   and   Only  Way  of 

Concord,  quoted,  56,  155,  156,  200, 

403,  435,  444,  463,  479,  497,  501 ; 

his  Five  Disputations  on  Ch.  Govt. 

quoted,  xxi,  153,  306,  385,  403,  470; 

Treatise  on    Kpiscopacy,  198,   357, 

479  ;  Search  for  the  English  Schis- 
matics, 471. 
Bayard,  Rev   Mr.,  quoted,  6. 
Baynes,  his  Diocesan's  Tryall,  quoted, 

136,   144,  153,  186,  198,  243,  244, 

320. 
Bellarmine,  quoted,  119,  149, 199,  246, 

252,  253. 
Bentley,  Dr.,  quoted,  252. 
Bernard,  Dr.,  quoted,  400,  401. 
Bethel,  Bishop,  quoted,  479. 
BevericJore,  Bishop,  quoted,  75, 149, 150, 

156,242,415,417. 
Beverly,  R.  M.,  Esq.,  his  Heresy  of 

Human   Priesthood,  quoted,   xxx — 

xxxii,  4,  50,  128,  292. 
Beza,  quoted,  510. 
Biblical    Repertory,  quoted,  237,  246, 

258,293,479. 
Biblical  Repository,  quoted,  301,  358, 

520. 
Bickersteth,  quoted,  128,  205,  269. 
Bigotry  of  Frelatists.     See  Prelatists. 
Binorham's     Origines     EcclesiasticEB, 

quoted,  113,  115,  116,  117,  119,  120, 

198,  234,  248,  430,  480,  481. 
Bird  on  the  Oxford  Tract  System,  270. 
Bishops  and  Presbyters  identical,  156, 

159. 
Blackburne,  Archdeacon,  quoted,  323, 

475. 
Blair,  Rev.  Robert,  quoted,  395,  402, 

403. 
Blair's  History  of  the  Waldenses,  quo- 
ted, 42,  205,  513. 
Blondel,  David,  quoted,  62. 
Blunt  on  the  Articles,  quoted,  381. 
Bossuet,  his  intolerance,  548 
Boardman,  Rev.  H.  A.,  quoted,  271, 

288. 
Bowden,  Dr.,  quoted,  xiv,  52,  54,  80, 

102,   103,  133,  143,  1.51,  222,  234, 

240,242,291,323,324,416. 
Boyd,  Rev.  Mr.,  of  Derry,  quoted,  97, 

157,  203,  222. 
Bower's  History  of  the  Popes,  quoted, 

185,191,192,193,246,247. 
Bradford,  Bishop  and  Martyr,  quoted, 

186,  392. 
Bramhall,    Archbishop,    quoted,   112, 

397,:418. 
Brett,  Mr.  quoted,  149, 150. 


Bristed,  Counsellor,  quoted,  xv,  xvi, 

xviii,  165,  296,  344,  349,  354,  363. 
British  Critic,  quoted,  3,5,7,16,23, 

73,  110,  111,  112,  183,  262,  263,264, 

270,  289, 290, 291, 299, 300,  309, 310, 

311,312,  379. 
Burnet,  Bishop,  quoted,  8, 12,  57,  63, 

84,  85,  89,  114,  115,  120,  122,  205, 

207,  211,  227,  384,  393,  394,  418, 

494,  498. 
Bull,  Bishop,  quoted,  62,  68, 108,  186, 

218,371,473,497,548. 
Burton,  Dr.,  Hist,  of  the  Ch.  quoted, 

253. 
Butt's  Obs.  on  Kebles  on  Tradition, 

270. 
ButI,  Dr.  S.,  his  Discourse  on  Church 

Government,  quoted,  241. 
Buyers,  Rev.  Wm.,  Missionary,  quoted, 

343. 
By  field.  Rev.  Richard,  540,  541. 

C. 

Causa  Episcopatus,  Hierarch.  Lucifu- 

ga,  quoted,  164. 
Calamy,  quoted,  101,  193,  470,  554. 
Calderwood's    Altare     Damascenum, 

quoted,  42,  137. 253,  375. 
Calvin,  quoted.  63,  108,  11.5,  122,  146, 

185,193,246,367,497,540. 
Campbell,  Professor,  rebuke  to  Dod- 

well,  quoted,  19,  87,  162,  186,  214, 

243,  355, 444. 
Campbell,  Dr.,  of  Armagh,  quoted,  97, 

458. 
Canons,  the,  of  Ch.  of  England,  quot- 
ed, 63. 
Cardwell'a      Documentary      Annals, 

quoted,  300. 
Cassander,  quoted,  539. 
Cathedral,  the,  quoted,  365. 
Cartwright,  quoted,  64,  65,  470. 
Cashel,  the  Archbishop  of,  quoted,  269. 
Catholic  Church,  what,  43,  484,  485, 

487,  489,  491,  &c.  499,  505,  531. 
Catholic   Miscellany,   of   Charleston, 

quoted,  273,  283,  420. 
Ceswall,  Rev.  Mr.,  quoted,  p.  23. 
Challenge,  what   we,  Introd.  §  v,  p. 

XXV. 

Chandler,  Dr.  quoted,  42,  111,  475, 
476. 

Chapman,  Dr.  quoted, 2.51,  323. 

Chauncy,  Dr.  of  Boston,  quoted,  xxvii, 
13,383,475,509,511. 

Charleston  Gospel  Messenger,  quoted, 
XX,  5,  8,  36,262,  299,  447,  448. 

Cheever,  Rev.  Mr.,  quoted,  343. 

Chester,  Bishop  of,  quoted,  123. 

Chillingworth,  quoted,  36,  48,  57,  58, 
59,  67, 121,  184,  205,  227,  437,  473. 

Christ's  prerogative,  invaded  by  prel- 
atists, 320. 


I>'DEX. 


561 


Chris lian  Observer,  the  London,  quo- 
ted, xxviii.  xix,  d,  14,  16,  61,  101, 
112,  21  d,  257, 258. 2(51 .  265, 2H8. 279, 
2dO,  251 ,  2s3, 2lt2, 345, 37c,  38t,  422, 
479. 

Chnsostom,  quoted,  102,  237,  239, 
247,251,301,  304,499. 

Church.  The,  Independent  of  the  Civil 
Government,  quoted.  62. 

Church,  the,  destroyed bv  prelacy,  145; 
what,  161,171,229.543. 

Church,  the  indefectible,  as  prelatists 
teach,  77. 

Church,  The,  in  England  and  America 
Compared,  quoted,  325 

Church  and  state,  prelatic  views  on. 
32S.  329. 

Church,  the  English,  parties  in,  3S9, 
and  Lect.  ivii.  442,  475,  479. 

Church,  several  meanings  of  the  word, 
456-45-5,  4f»9. 

Church,  not  the  clergy,  499,  500. 

Churchman.The,  quoted,  sxi,  105, 106. 

Civil  magistrate,  has  plenary  power, 
as  prelatists  teach,  in  ecclesiastical 
matters.  315,  317. 

Clageett.Dr.  quoted,  S7, 197,408,429, 
437,  475,  496,  549. 

Clark.  Rev.  Dr.  of  Philadelphia,  quot- 
ed, 7,5,95.  ]25.271,2?5. 

Claude,  of  Turin,  quoted,  05. 

Clement  of  Alexandria,  102,  499,  5^5, 
536.  542. 

Colliers  Eccl.  History,  quoted,  520. 

Coleman's  Christian  Antiquities,  quot- 
ed. 233.  2-53. 

Coleman.  Rev.  John,  quoted,  474. 

Colton.  Rev.  Mr.  quoted,  357. 

Commission  of  Christ  to  the  Apos- 
tles, 142,  144. 

Conder,  Protestant  Nonconformity, 
quoted,  54  ;  his  View.  inc.  507,  539. 

Confession  of  Fciith,  quoted,  9, 10,  37, 
38.  491,  &c. 

Congregatioualists.  See  Indepen- 
dents. 

Controversy,  demanded  of  us,  8,  9, 
15,  16 ;  importance  of  this,  In- 
trod.  sect.  iii.  and  iv.  ;  the  cause 
of  all  denominations  at  state,  14, 
17  ;  how  long  it  must  continue.  19. 

Cooke,  Dr.  quoted,  xxv,  52,  103, 143. 

Cooke,  Rev.  Dr.  of  Ireland,  quoted, 
532 

Corbet  on  the  Church,  quoted,  435, 
513. 

Cos.  Mr.  A.  Cleveland,  quoted,  324. 

Cox.  Dr.  Chaplain  to  Queen  Eliza- 
beth, quoted.  54. 

Crabbes  English  Synonymes.  quoted, 
4^4. 

Cramp's  Text-Book  of  Popery,  quot- 
ed, xiii. 

71 


Cranmer.  quoted,  155,  905,  218. 
Croft,  Herbert.  Bishop   of  Hereford, 

quoted,  100, 101, 103,  136,  143.  150, 

159,  500. 
Cumber,  Dr.  quoted,  193. 
Cummings's  Apology   for  the  Ch.  of 

Scotland.  386,  451. 
Cyprian,  quoted.  14.103,168,192,301, 

302,  414,  506.  536. 
Cyril,  of  Jerusalem,  quoted,  45,  82. 
Cyril,  of  Alexjmdria,  quoted,  61,  536. 

D. 

Daubeny's  Guide  to  the  Church,  quot- 
ed, XX,  49,  327,  329,  435,  442. 

Davenant.  Bishop,  quoted.  69, 148. 149, 
165,  175,  245,  262,  326,  353,  406, 
463,  502. 

Dehon,  Bishop.  264. 

Delahogue,  quoted,  512. 

Dechard.  quoted,  101. 

Dick's  Theology,  quoted.  444. 

DIsraeU.  Genius  of  Judaism,  quoted, 
355. 

Divine  Right  of  the  Ministrv.  quoted, 
156,  190",  239,  374,  375,  490,  497, 
554. 

Doane,  Bishop,  quoted,  247,  243,  250, 
262;  his  great  prudence  Eind  mis- 
take, 285,  322,  324. 

Doctrine,  true,  the  all-essential  mark 
of  a  true  church,  532 — 5. 

Doctrine  of  the  Succession.  See 
Question. 

Dodwell.  quoted,  91.  105,  149,  175, 
252,  366,  367.  3G5.  414,  451. 

Dodsworth  on  Romanism  and  Dissent, 
quoted,54,  ?3,  91,  191,216. 

Dryden,  quoted,  37.  3-51 

Dudley,  Hon.  Judge,  design  of  his 
Lecture,  xxiv. 

Dupin,  quoted,  512. 

Dutch  Reformed  churches,  bigotry  of 
prelacy  towards,  23. 

Dwight,  Dr.,  quoted,  352. 


Eclectic  Review,  the.  quoted.  362, 479. 

Edorar's  Variations  of  Popery,  quoted, 
199,  5U7. 

Edinburgh  Review,  quoted,  5, 121, 175, 
1S7.  307,  373. 

Edinburffh  'Witness,  quoted,  479. 

Edwards.  Dr..  quoted.  1:36.  305. 

Eleutherius,  quoted,  103. 

EUiss  Hist,  of  Madagascar,  quoted, 
■M7. 

Elys  Call  to  Hear  the  Ch.  Exam.,  553. 

English  Reformation,  a  relation  of,  &a:. 
quoted,  213. 

England,  Bishop,  of  Charleston,  quo- 
ted, 6,  56. 

Ephesus,  Council  of,  13,  506,  520. 


562 


INDEX. 


Epiphanius,  quoted,  190,  192. 

Episcopacy,  distinct  altogether  from 
the  question  of  hijjh-churchism,  6, 
7 ;  we  make  no  attack  on  episcopacy 
as  such,  Intro.  §  i.  G,  GO ;  only  a  rite, 
59  ;  not  in  scripture,  this  admitted, 
73  ;  this  distinction  granted,  7. 

Episcopal  church  in  this  country,  nov- 
elty of,  507,  506,  509. 

Episcopal  Tract  Society,  now  identi- 
fied with  Oxford  divinity,  285,  500. 

Episcopal  Recorder,  the,  quoted,  128, 
249,  2G9,  282,  286,  422,  439,  441, 
442. 

Episcopius,  hi.?  views  on  this  doctrine, 
quoted,  53,  225. 

Escott,  Rev.  T.,  bigotry  of,  3. 

Espenceus,  quoted,  251. 

Essays  on  tlie  Church,  quoted,  270. 

Essays  on  Romanism,  quoted,  80. 

Es.-iential  truths  all  in  the  Bible,  48 ; 
what,  .50. 

Eusebius,  quoted,  79,  188,  236,  499. 

Eutherius,  Bishop  of  Tyana,  quoted, 
434. 

Evangelical  episcopalians.  See  Low- 
church. 

Evangelical  Magazine,  Lond.  quoted, 
345. 

Exeter,  Bp.  of,  quoted,  xxii. 

Extent  of  this  doctrine,  4,  111,  285, 
2:6,  and  the  whole  context,  425 ; 
avowed  in  Charleston,  447,  448. 

F. 
Faber's  Vallenses  and  Albigenses,  quo- 
ted, 43,  65,  122,  146,  205,  371,  375, 

418,  507,  quoted,  269,  485. 
Faber,  Rev.  F.  VV.,  quoted,  456. 
Fabricius,  quoted,  106. 
Fathers,  our,  the  memory  of,  20,  21. 
Fathers,  the,  not  authoritative,  35,  46, 

47,   76,   <fec.  80  ;    uncertainty   and 

confusion  of,  79,  80  ;  perverted  and 

abused,  81. 
Fell,  Bp.  quoted,  149. 
Field,  Dr.  quoted,  116,  121,  375,  473. 
Firmilian,  quoted,  537. 
Firmin,  liis  Separation  Exam,  quoted, 

543,  544. 
Fitzgerald  on  Episcopacy,  &c.  270. 
Fleetwood,  Bp.  quoted,  b. 
Formularies  of  Faith,  in  the  reign  of 

Henry  VIll.,  quoted,  492,  526,  527. 
Foster,  Sir  Michael,  Knt.  quofed,  133, 

210,  291,  302,  303,  306,  321,  383, 

500. 
Fowler,  Rev.  Andrew,  quoted,  xx,  237. 
Fowler,  Bp.,  quoted,  46,  87,  226,  390, 

549. 
Fox,  quoted,  201,  203,  418. 
Freeman,  Dr.  quoted,  549. 
Frith,  John,  Martyr,  quoted,  64. 


Froude,  Rev.   Mr.  quoted,  216,  249^ 

344. 
Fry.  Caroline,  quoted,  250,  255,  256. 
Fulk,  Dr.  quoted,  185,  193. 

G. 

Gadsden,  Bp.  quoted,  324. 

Genevan  Confession,  quoted,  491. 

Gerhard,  quoted,  541. 

Gibson,  Bp.  quoted,  300,  382. 

GieseJer's  Ecc.  Hist.,  quoted,  517. 

Gisborne,  Rev.  Mr.  quoted,  409. 

Gladstone,  Mr.  quoted,  261. 

Gobat's  Ab}'ssinia,  quoted,  .501. 

Godwin's  Lives  of  English  Bishops, 
quoted,  207. 

Goodman,  Bp.,  a  papist,  284. 

Gordon's  History  of  Ireland,  quoted, 
202. 

Gordon,  Rev.  Mr.,  quoted,  243,  511, 
512. 

Gregg,  Rev.  L  D.,  his  insulting  lan- 
guage, quoted,  24. 

Gregory  Nyssene,  quoted,  82. 

Gregory,  Bishop  of  Rome,  quoted,  524, 
525. 

Grotius,  quoted,  237,  435. 

H. 

Hale,  Sir  Matthew,  quoted,  409. 

Hales,  the  ever-memorable,  quoted,  54, 
101, 186, 407, 414,  468,  470,  500, 512. 

Halifax,  Dr.  Samuel,  quoted,  p.  408. 

Hall,  Rev.  Robert,  quoted,  474. 

Hall,  Bp.,  quoted,  205,  218,369,370, 
392,  357,  495,  540. 

Hallam's  Const.  Hist,  quoted,  284. 

Hammond,  Dr.  quoted,  71,  149,  191, 
252,415. 

Hanbury's  ed.  of  Hooker,  470,  &c. 

Harm  on  V  of  Conf  of  the  Reformed 
churches,  496,  499,  525,  540. 

Harris,  Dr.  quoted,  218,  384,  431,  474. 

Hawks,  Dr.  quoted,  342,  426,  427, 428, 
507. 

Havv'kins,  Dr.,  his  Dissertation  on  Un- 
authoritative Tradition,  quoted,  35. 

Heber,  Bp.,  quoted,  71,  149,  170,  408, 
513,  548. 

Hegisippus,  quoted,  79. 

Helvetic  Confession,  quoted,  63,  .525. 

Henderson,  Alexander,  quoted,  34,72, 
79,  458. 

Henry,  Matthew,  his  work  on  Schism, 
quoted,  99,  153,  416,  443,  444,  quo- 
ted also  138,320,471,482. 

Henderson,  Rev.  Alexander,  quoted, 
190. 

Heresy,  what,  according  to  Mr.  Palm- 
er, 58. 

Hewitt's  Hist,  of  S.  C.  quoted,  324 

Hicks,  Bp.,  quoted,  150. 

Hide,  Dr.  quoted,  xxi. 


INDEX, 


563 


High-church  Miracles,  quoted,  95. 

High-churchism,  see  Low-churclaism. 
History  of  its  principles,  xxx. 

Higii-churchism.  propriety  ot  this  term 
explained,  8,  2!),  335,  341.  An  old 
Treatise  on,  quoted,  8.  On  its  use 
among  Episcopalians,  see  references 
on,  8.  On  its  injurious  effects  on 
missionary  ground,  343,  344. 

Hinds,  of  Queen's  College,  Oxford, 
quoted,  50,  78,  137,  149,  191,  244, 
245,  246,  347,  430,  506. 

Hill,  Dr.,  his  View  of  the  Constitution 
of  the  Church  of  Scotland,  quoted, 
42  ;  Lectures,  194. 

History  of  Popery,  by  several  gentle- 
men, 101. 

Historical  and  Rational  Inquiry  into 
the  necessity  of  an  Uninterrupted 
Succession,  quoted,  152. 

Hoadly,  Bp..  quoted,  126,  148,  149, 
161,253,265,393,468. 

Hobart,  Rev.  Noah,  quoted,  475. 

Hobart,  Bp.,  quoted,  xx,  6,  336,  337, 
characterized,  404,  and  note  to  lect. 
xiii,  500. 

Hodge,  Dr.,  his  Constitutional  Hist, 
of  the  Presb.  Church,  quoted,  448, 
476, 509. 

Hodson,  Archdeacon,  quoted,  472. 

Holden,  on  Tradition,  quoted,  270. 

Holmes,  Dr.,  quoted,  230. 

Home,  Rev.  T.  Hartwell,  quoted,  408, 
416. 

Hough,  Rev.  Mr.,  quoted,  165,  170, 
206,  240. 

Hook's  Call  to  Union  answered,  quo- 
ted, 270,  317,  319,  377. 

Hooker,  quoted,  48,  54,71,149,179, 
193,  200,  253,  320,  355,  493,  52». 

Hooper,  Bishop  and  Martyr,  quoted, 
64,233,554. 

How,  Dr.,  his  Vindication  of  the 
Protestant  Episcopal  church,  quo- 
ted, xiv.  xix,  xxii,  50,  52,  54,  108, 
155,  214,  303,  323,  410,  416,  448. 

Howe,  Rev.  John,  quoted,  173,542. 

Howitt's  Hist,  of  Priestcraft,  305. 

Huguenots,  presbyterians,  and  perse- 
cuted by  prelatists,  559. 

Humphrej's,  Dr.,  quoted.  475. 

Hurd,  Bp.,  quoted,  100,  204. 

I. 

Ignatius,  quoted,  132,  237,  536,  537 

Implicit  subjection  required,  by  prela- 
tists, to  their  laws,  whether  right  or 
wrong,  3!2,  317. 

Independents  or  congregationalists, 
bigotry  of  prelatists  towards,  23,  24. 

Inett,  Dr.  quoted,  201. 

Innocent,  Pope,  quoted,  97. 

Intolerance  and  cruel  tendency  of  pre- 


lacy, 171,  &c.  exemplified,  318,  319, 

324,  325,  326,  342,  344,  469,  470. 
Invisible  churcli,  what,  487. 
IrencEus,   quoted,   43,   102,   188,  414, 

506,  535,  537. 
Irving,  Rev.  Edward,  his  Confessions 

of  Faith,  quoted,  492,540. 
Isidore  of  Pelusium,  quoted,  304,  305. 


Jackson,  Rev.  Thomas,  quoted,  54, 
145,  163,  218,  245,  353,  371,  372, 
430, 505, 540. 

Jackson,  Rev.  Miles,  quoted,  270. 

Jameson,  Rev.  Wm.,  Lecturer  of  His- 
tory in  the  University  of  Glasgow, 
quoted,  xxv,  151,  348. 

Jebb,  Bishop,  quoted,  xxxi. 

Jerome,  quoted,  71,  191.  236. 

Jewell,  Bishop,  quoted,  70,  163. 

Johnson's  Clergyman's  Vade  Mecum, 

Jones,  Rev.  Rlr.,  of  Nayland,  quoted, 

xxi,  57,  69,  457,  470,  505. 
Jones,  Rev.  Mr.,  of  Oswestree,  quoted, 

200. 
Justin  Martyr,  quoted,  102,  535. 

K. 

Keble,  Professor,  of  Oxford,  quoted,  6, 
56,  57,  69,  70,  75,  84,  94,  103,  104, 
156,213,221,261,289,296,297,372, 
353,  545. 

Kenrick,  R.  Catholic  Bishop,  his  letter 
to  the  Prelatists,  proposing  union, 
295. 

King's  Primitive  Christianity, 434, 474, 
499,521,523. 

Knapp's  Theology,  quoted,  431,  539. 

Knox,  John,  quoted,  63. 

Knox,  Bishop,  testimony  of,  395,  396. 


Lactantius,  quoted,  102,  535. 

Laity,  the,  by  this  doctrine  to  be 
excluded  from  all  conventions  in 
America,  and  kept  excluded  in  Eng- 
land, 309,  312. 

Lardner,  quoted,  188. 

Lathbury,  Rev.  Thomas,  quoted,  419. 

Laud.  Archbishop,  his  views,  54,  149, 
150',  185,  217,  291,  323,  450;  true 
character  of,  344,  346. 

Launoy,  quoted,  499. 

Law,  Rev.  Wm.,  quoted,  150. 

Ledwich's  Antiq.  of  Ireland,  quoted, 
202. 

Leger's  Work  on  the  Waldenses,  545. 

Leslie,  quoted,  !.'5,  110,  138,  150,  166, 
176,368,415,427,418,497,505,540. 

Letters  of  the  Martyrs,  edited  by 
Bickersteth,  quoted,  20,  21,  205, 
233. 


564 


INDEX. 


Liberality  of  Presbyterianism,  38. 

Lightfoot,  quoted,  149,  24G. 

Liinborch,  quoted,  3G7,  549. 

Liturgy,  this  does  not  characterize 
prelacy,  or  form  the  subject  of  dis- 
cussion, 7. 

Livingston,  Rev.  Jolm,  quoted,  396, 
400. 

Livingston,  Dr.,  quoted,  13,475,  509. 

London  Quarterly  Review,  quoted, 
183,  207,  217,  230,  232,  317,  319, 
423. 

Loque,  M.  Bertrand  de,  of  Dolphinee, 
quoted,  502. 

Low-church  episcopalians,  on  the  dis- 
tinction, 8,  29,  335,  341  ;  our  kind- 
ness towards,  pref.  6,  42,  484,  &c. ; 
are  coming  over  to  this  doctrine,  123. 

Lowth,  Bishop,  quoted,  177. 

Loyd,  Bishop,  quoted,  190. 

Luther,  quoted,  G2,  525,  540. 

Lutherans  and  Reformed  churches, 
bigotry  of  prelatists  towards,  27. 

Lyra  Aposlolica,  quoted,  170. 

M. 

Magdeburgh  centuriators,  quoted,  185. 

Maunbourgh,  quoted,  126. 

Manning,  Rev.  Mr.,  quoted,  111. 

Marechal,  Archbishop,  quoted,  367. 

Marechal's  Concord.  Sanct.  Patrum 
Gr.  et  Lat.  499. 

Mason's  Viridicice  Eccl.  Angllcanae, 
quoted,  112. 

Mason,  Rev.  Dr.,  quoted,  119,  151, 
294. 

Mason,  Dr.  Monck,  quoted,  202. 

Martyn,  Henry,  quoted,  260. 

Mayhew's  Observations,  475. 

Maurice  on  the  popery  of  the  Oxford 
tracts,  270. 

McCaul,  Alexander,  D.  D.,  of  Trinity 
College,  Dublin,  his  Old  Patiis  quo- 
ted, 30  ;  Sketches  of  Judaism,  259. 

McCrio's  Life  of  Knox,  quoted,  54, 
93, 204, 248, 249, 459 ;  on  Unity,  430, 
510. 

McCrie,  Rev.  Thomas,  quoted,  291. 

Mcllvaine,  Bishop,  quoted,  xiv.  253, 
270,271,284,384,422. 

Meade,  Bishop,  quoted,  xx:,  52,  249, 
271,391,322,406,407,520. 

Melancthon,  quoted,  62,  163. 

Melville,  Rev.  Mr.,  quoted,  353. 

Mendhams,  his  History  of  the  Council 
of  Trent,  quoted,  36. 

Methodists,  bigotry  of  prelatists  to- 
wards, 26,  46 ;  their  Quart.  Review, 
quoted,  267,  474. 

Mildert,  Van,  Bishop,  218,  417,  513. 

Miller,  Dr.  George,  his  letter  to  Dr. 
Pusey  quoted,  47, 185,  258,261,270, 
320,  497. 


Miller,  Dr.  Samuel,  quoted,  188,  190, 

246, 360, 387,  498. 
Miller,  Rev.  John,  quoted,  xxxi. 
Milman,  quoted,  172,  253,   349,   350, 

517. 
Milner,   Rev.   Dr.,  quoted,  20C,  220, 

231,  418. 
Milner's  Church  History,  quoted,  409. 
Ministry,   proper    subjects    for,    114, 

162;  what  is  essential  to  the  beinf 

of,  497,  .507,  543. 
Miracles  demanded  inproofof  prelatic 

claims,  77,  78,  &c. 
Mitchell,  Dr.,  Presbyterian  Letters  to 

Bishop    Skinner,    quoted,    54,    108, 

112, 116,117,  118, 119, 133, 134, 135, 

164,209,  211,21.5,222,253,  458,480. 
Monro,  Dr.,  quoted,  149. 
Moor,  De,  quoted,  62,  101. 
Moore,  Bishop,  quoted,  271,  549. 
Morton,  Bishop,  474. 
Mosheim's  Commentaries,  quoted, 190, 

435,  436. 
Morning  Exercises  against  popery, 218. 
Muir,  Rev.  Dr.,  quoted,  30,  31. 
Musculus,  quoted,  555. 

N. 

Neal's  History  of  the  Puritans,  quoted, 
64,  72,  185,  199,  218,  258,  291,  293, 
305,  365. 

Necessity  for  examining  and  discuss- 
ino- this  subject,  Introd. ;  this  due  to 
its  abettors,  xxiii,  5,  110,  111,  155, 
287;  this  due  to  ourselves  and  our  just 
claims,  xxiii,  9,  44;  this  due  to  truth 
and  liberty.  13,  44,  111  287;  this 
due  to  charity  and  peace,  Introd., 
18;  this  due  to  the  memory  of  our 
fathers,  20;  Dr.  Rice  on,  29,  30; 
Mr.  Perceval  on,  30;  this  doctrine 
cuts  off  all  other  denominations  from 
salvation,  Introd-  §  3. 

Necessary  doctrine  of  erudition,  quo- 
ted, 492,  .526,  527. 

Nelson's  Life  of  Bishop  Bull,  quoted, 
217. 

Newman,  his  Lectures  on  Romanism 
and  Dissent,  quoted,  12, 16,  36,  43, 
58.  67,  ()S,  69,  78,  82,  88,  107,  146, 
165, 199,210,  261,  289,  290,  313. 

New  York  Review,  quoted,  8. 

Nice,  council  of,  quoted,  13,  192. 

Nichols,  Dr.  William,  quoted,  150. 

Noel,  Hon.  and  Rev.  B.  W.,  quoted, 
85,  148,151,390,431,551. 

Nolan,  Rev.  Mr.,  quoted,  205,  270. 

Norwich,  the  bishop  of,  quoted,  20. 

Noyes,  Rev.  Mr.,  quoted,  xxvi. 

O. 

Odenheimer,  Rev.  Mr.  of  Philadelphia, 
quoted,  6,  7,  117,  322,  323,  418. 


INDEX. 


565 


Onderdonk,  Bishop,  quoted,  xiv.  39, 

40,  46,  50,  G8,  73, 1)2,  93,  106,  131, 
233,  356. 

Optatus,  quoted,  190. 
Ordination,    what    presbyterians  and 
the   reformers  believe    concerninor 

41,  42,  156,  157,  160,  510-512; 
presbyterian  ordination,  cases  of, 
157  ;  form  of,  essential  to  prelatical 
ordination,  113,  114,  156. 

Origen,  quoted,  102. 

Osborne's  Doctrinal  Errors  of  the 
Apostolical  Fathers,  3)1. 

Overton's  True  Churchman,  218,  479. 

Owen,  Dr.  quoted,  61,  164,  247,  414, 
419,  426, 431, 432, 442, 443, 460,  463, 
471,  496. 

Oxford  Tracts,  quoted,  4,  6,  8,  11,  14, 
16, 17,  25,  26,  34,  40,  45,  46,  53,  55, 
71,72,  82,  83,  90,  111,  113,  144,  145, 
157,  168,  176, 183,245,289,  299,  352, 
365,  363,  473, 529,  540.  Origin  and 
history  of,  xxix — xxxi. 


Palmer's  Treatise  on  the  Church, 
quoted,  3,  6, 8, 14,  16, 25,  26,  27,  36, 
39, 42,  43,  46,  50,  56,  57,  58,  59,  62, 
65,  67,  63,  69,  78,  82, 88,  90, 93, 108, 
109,  111, 113, 116, 118, 119, 120, 122, 
131,  149,156,198,199,205,208,216, 
232,242,261.289,293,313,314,315, 
318,  417,  474,  476,  500;  Antiq.  of 
the  English  Ritual,  .520. 

Paley,  quoted,  134,  408. 

Papacy,  the,  antichristian,  204,  &c. 

Parker,  Arciibishop,  his  consecration 
invalid,  210,  &c. 

Parry  on  Inspiration,  quoted,  246. 

Pastoral  Letter  of  Roman  Catliolic 
Bishops,  quoted,  231. 

Patrick,  Bishop,  quoted,  474. 

Paul,  Father,  of  the  order  of  Servites, 
quoted,  226. 

Payne,  Dr.,  quoted,  81,  436,  549. 

Pearson,  Bishop,  quoted,  149,  192, 
430,  505,  540. 

Perceval,  Rev.  Mr.  G.  quoted,  424. 

Perceval,  on  tlie  Apostolical  Succes- 
sion, quoted,  15,  30,  112,  116,134, 
135,  221,  291,  474:  his  character, 
327. 

Permanent  moderators,  allowable  by 
presbyterians,  though  not  expedient, 
42. 

Perkins,  Rev.  Mr.,  quoted,  218. 

Peler,  never  at  Rome,  185,  186,  233  ; 
never  Bishop  of  Rome,  187  ;  had  no 
certain  successors,  187,  194,  233. 

Philpot,  bishop  and  martyr,  392. 

Pierce's  Vind.  of  Dissenters,  258,  470. 

Pierce,  Rev.  Edward,  Rector,  his  Vin- 
dication of  the  Principles  and  Prac- 


tices of  the  Moderate  Divines  and 
Laity  of  the  Church  of  England, 
quoted,  29. 

Platen's  Summary  of  Christian  Doc- 
trine, quoted,  54. 

Polish  Agreement,  the,  quoted,  63. 

Polycarp,  536. 

Popery,  the,  of  the  Oxford  Tracts,  de- 
veloped, quoted,  270. 

Popes,  the  character  and  succession  of, 
199,  200,  225,  227. 

Popery,  History  of,  by  several  gen- 
tlemen, quoted,  227;  principles  of, 
259. 

Potter,  Archbishop,  on  Church  Gov- 
ernment, quoted,  54,  134,  149,168, 
171,  172, 192,244,246,247,302,371, 
348, 352,  355,  430,  437,  506,  530. 

Powell,  Thomas,  a  Wesleyan  minister, 
his  Essay  on  the  Apostolical  Suc- 
cession, quoted, 11  14,  78,  207,238, 
291,355,305,385. 

Powell,  Professor,  of  Oxford,  quoted, 
4,  29,  78,  103,  159,  163,  193,  266, 
267,  302, 326,  422,  507. 

Pratt's  Old  Patlis,  quoted,  xix,  40, 101, 
142,326,348,416. 

Preaching,  opposed  by  prelates,  248, 

Prelacy,  why  the  term  used,  see  8  ;  ex- 
tent of,  4 ;  guilt  of,  554-6, 173  ;  what 
we  object  to,  7,  3,  38,  39,  105,  127  ; 
leads  to  popery,  16,  17,  46,  207,  217, 
257,  &c.  302 ;  unreasonable,  83  ; 
afraid  of  scripture,  94,  232,103,  130, 
&c.  159;  made  an  article  of  the 
faith,  36;  not  in  scripture  73,  83, 
87,  99 ;  irreverence  toward  scrip- 
ture, 96 ;  destroys  the  church,  121 
122,  145,  146,  147,  152,  194,  238, 
373,  &c.  507,  546 ;  against  preach- 
ing, 248  ;  has  originated  sects,  469, 
470,  472,  478. 

Prelatists,  bigotry  of,  3,  4,  5,  7,  11, 
17;  fully  shown  in  Note  A,  Lect. 
i.  38,  52",  56,  105,  106,  110,  111,  318, 
319;  rebuked,  19,  175,  183,  319; 
their  discord,  131 ;  argue  popishly, 
146,  175. 

Presbyterians,  what  we  believe  on  this 
subject,  9,  10,  37,  41,  66,  74,  U4, 
«S:c.  122,  485,  489,  490,  491  ;  heredi- 
tary opposition  of  to  prelacy,  20,  66  ; 
bigotry  of  prelatists  towards,  24 ; 
their  fearlessness,  164-173;  not 
schismatics,  Lect.  xvii. 

Presbyterianism,  extent  of,  14,  21  ; 
liberality  of,  38 ;  fearlessness  of 
scripture,  94  ;  reverence  for  scrip- 
ture, 96;  security  of,  122,  135,  1.52, 
159,  160,  177,  178,  373,  374,  544 ; 
demonstrated,  176. 

Presbyterianism     defended,    by    four 


566 


INDEX. 


members  of  the  synod  of  Ulster,  in 

Ireland,  quoted,  5,  88,  214. 
Presbyters,   their   succession   certain, 

135,136,159,160,176,  178. 
Presbytery,  plea  for,  quoted,  116,  161, 

190,  199,  !i01,291,  472. 
Price,  Dr.  his  Hist,  of  Prot.  Nonconf. 

quoted,  325,  326,  386,  418,  470,  471, 

513. 
Profession,  the  author's  public  form  of, 

scriptural,   reasonable,   and  proper, 

&c.  quoted,  520. 
Proof,   the    burden  of,   on  prelatists. 

37,  174,  184,  240. 
Prosper,  quoted,  304. 
Protestantism,  the  doctrine  of,  stated, 

60,  62,  65. 
Protestant,    prelatists    repudiate    the 

name,  216;  and  the  thing,  292,  293. 
Puritans,  the,  459,  470-472. 
Pusey,  Dr.  quoted.  4,  11.  72,91,  111, 

139,  216,  247,  261,  289,  290,  317, 

320,  354,  498. 

Question,  the  question  at  issue  fully 
stated,  Introd.  §  i .  and  iii.  37,  44,52, 
55, 105,  106, 110,  127,  132,  147, 174, 
181,  182,  195,  230,  231,  348,  483, 
484,  489,  490;  the  importance  at- 
tached to  it,  111,112,155. 

R. 

Ravenscroft,  Bishop,  quoted,  xix,  74, 
112,337. 

Rebaptization  condemned,  and  Separa 
tion  without  Schism,  quoted,  15. 

Record,  the  London,  quoted,  275,  276, 
292. 

Rees'  Encyclopedia,  quoted,  116. 

Reid's  Hist,  of  the  Presb.  Ch.  in  Ire- 
land, quoted,  248. 

Report  of  the  Edinburgh  Celebration 
of  the  Second  Reformation,  quoted, 
11. 

Republicanism,  prelacy  opposed  to, 
311,312,320-322. 

Resbury,  Dr.,  quoted,  78,  549. 

Reynolds,  Bishop,  quoted,  185. 

Rh'ind,  Rev.  Mr.  149. 

Riddle's  Ecclesiastical  Ch'-onology, 
quoted,  193.  387 ;  his  Christian  An- 
tiquities, 223,  387,  433. 

Rice,  Dr.  on  High-churchism,  29,  30, 
296,  335,  327,  330,  348,  351,  462; 
on  the  fathers,  xxvi,  80, 122  :  quoted, 
xxiv,  174,  186,  212,  260,  430,  549. 
See  his  Letter  on  High-churchism, 
Note  D  to  Lect.  xiii. 

Rights  of  the  Christian  Church,  quot- 
ed, 118,  197,  321,  366,  368,  375, 409, 
421,  510. 

Rogers'  Life  of  Howe,  358. 


Romish  church,  as  prelatists  teach, 
true  and  orthodox,  296 ;  antichris- 
tian,  as  all  protestant  churches 
teach,  204  -  208. 

Rose,  Rev.  Mr.  quoted,  218. 

Rufinus,  quoted,  247,  536,  537. 

Rushworth,  quoted,  72. 

Rutherford's  Due  Right  of  Presbyte- 
ries, quoted,  60,  549;  his  Plea,  &c. 
218,  456. 

S. 

Sadeel,  quoted,  555. 

Saire,  Rev.  Mr.,  149. 

Salters'  Hall  Sermons,  218. 

Saravia,  quoted,  70,  73,  96,  140,  149, 
416,417. 

Scaliger,  quoted,  185. 

Schism,  meaning  of  the  term  in  scrip- 
ture, 413,  443  ;  in  the  fathers,  414, 
427,443,481 ;  among  prelatists,  414, 
416;  exclusiveness  is  schism,  427, 
444,  478;  occasioned  by  prelates, 
469,471,472,478. 

Schism,  by  Dr.  Hoppus,  professor  in 
London,  a  prize  essay,  and  a  very 
larore  and  valuable  work,  quoted,  7, 
19,' 63,  89,  198,  319,431,432,437, 
500. 

Schismatics,  this  term  applied  by  pre- 
latists to  other  denominations,  323, 
324  ;  why  so  applied,  327,  328,  413, 
414,  416;  the  ancient  identified  with 
prelatists,  459,  403. 

Sclater,  a  Romanist,  quoted,  97. 

Scott,  Dr.  John,  quoted,  149,  415, 
436,  549. 

Scotland,  Church  of,  bigotry  of  pre- 
latists towards,  26,  &c.,  318. 

Sects  occasioned  by  prelacy,  469,  470, 
472, 478. 

Scotland,  our  Scottish  forefathers,  21, 
458. 

Scriptures,  the,  the  only  tribunal  by 
which  authoritative  decisions  can  be 
given,  34,  35,  &c.,  76,  &c. 

Seabury,  Bishop,  quoted,  157,  230,264, 
430. 

Sectarian,  who  is  the  true,  19. 

Seeker,  Archbishop,  quoted,  8,  323. 

Selden,  quoted,  510. 

Sendomir,  Synod  of,  525. 

Separation  not  schism,  511,  513,  517. 

Serious  Thoughts  on  a  late  adminis- 
tration of  Episcopal  Orders,  quoted, 
219. 

Sharp,  Archbishop,  quoted,  415,  505. 

Sherlock,  Bishop,  quoted,  48,  49,  393, 
417,  437,  449,  450,  474,  497, 
519. 

Shiel's  Hind  Let  Loose,  quoted,  457. 

Shuttle  worth.  Bishop,  quoted,  269. 

Sketch  of  the  history  and  principles  of 


INDEX, 


567 


the  Presbyterian  Churches  in  Eng- 
land, quoted,  31,  152. 

Skinner,  Bishop,  Quoted,  103, 292,  416. 

Slater's  Original  Draught,  414. 

Sniectymmius,  quoted,  305. 

Sinitli,  Bishop,  quoted,  218. 

Smith,  Dr.  Pye,  quoted,  43. 

Smith,  Dr.  Wm.,  his  petition  for  union 
ot  church  and  state,  329. 

South  Carolina,  the  opposition  of 
Episcopalians  in,  to  high-ciiurch 
notions,  405  ;  and  to  bishops,  508. 

Soames'  Elizabethian  Religious  Histo- 
ry, quoted,  3,  8,  322,  380,  471. 

Southvvark  Lectures,  218. 

Sozomen.  quoted,  304. 

Spalato,  Archbishop  of,  140,  510. 

Spanheim,  quoted,  149,  185,  186,  252. 

Sparl?s,  Rev.  Jared,  quoted,  211,  212, 
307. 

Staunton,  Rev.  Wm.,  quoted,  192,193, 
218,323,442,476. 

Stapi'er,  quoted,  53. 

Steele's  Philosophy  of  the  Evidences, 
&o.,  quoted,  149,  485. 

Stevens'  Spirit  of  tiie  Church  of  Rome, 
quoted,  200. 

Stillirigfleet,  quoted,  54,  61, 149,  190, 
200,  201,  248,  390,  430,  431,  407, 
496. 

Storr  and  Flatt's  Theol.,  quoted,  549. 

Stuart's  History  of  Armagh,  quoted, 
202,  400. 

Succession,  the  Romish,  broken,  121 ; 
that  of  presbyters  alone  undenied 
and  secure,  122,  135,  152, 159,  160, 
176,  179;  of  presbyters  believed,  43, 
181 ;  the  Anglican  depends  on  the 
Romish,  185,  204  ;  —  is  defective, 
200,  &c. ;  —  only  traces  back  to 
Henry  VIII.,  209;  a  separation,  217, 
218;  the  American,  doubtful,  218, 
&c.  ;  was  given  by  the  English 
crown,  and  is  thus  regal,  509 ;  its 
introduction  opposed,  509. 

Suiceri  Thesaurus,  quoted,  236,  499. 

Sumner,  John  Bird,  Bishop,  quoted, 
209. 

Sutiivius,  quoted,  252. 

Syrian  Church,  its  testimony,  206. 

T. 

Taylor,  Isaac,  his  Spiritual  Despotism, 

quoted,  40,  108,  109,  110,  130, 157, 

175, 185, 197, 213, 293, 301 , 306, 352 ; 

preface  to  Life  of  Luther,  227. 
Taylor,  Jeremy,  Bishop,  68,  87, 149, 

150,  157. 
Terms  of  communion  with  the  churcli 

catholic  can  only  be  prescribed  by 

Christ,  56. 
TertuUian,  quoted,  82,  103,  163,  190, 

191,  237,  436,  457,  534. 


Tests,  the,  by  which  this  doctrine  must 

be  tried,  105,  &c. ;  a  very  practical 

one, 553,  556, 
Theodoret,  103,  234. 
Theophilus  of  Alexandria,  quoted,  81, 

304  ;  of  Antioch,  536,  537. 
Theophilact,  quoted,  237. 
Thomas,  William,  Esq.,  quoted,  306. 
Thorpe,  Dr.,  quoted,  46,  199. 
TiUotson,    Archbisliop,    quoted,    150, 

351,  397. 
Tomline,  Bishop,  quoted,  72. 
Tonneins,  Synod  of,  quoted,  63,  525. 
Toplady,  Rev.  JMr.,  quoted,  408. 
Towgood,  Rev.  Mr.,  quoted,  320,  370, 

472. 
Townsend,  Archdeacon,  quoted,  312, 

313. 
Tradition  made  by  prelatists  of  equal 

authority  with  the  Bible,  289,  296, 

297. 
Troughton's  Apology,  470. 
True  Character  of  a  Churchman,  the, 

quoted,  421. 
Tucker,  Rev.  John,  his  Dudleian  Lec- 
ture, quoted,  51. 
Turretine,  quoted,  53,   62,   101,   512, 

539,  549. 

U. 

Uncovenanted  mercies,  see  on,  Introd. 

§  iii,  171. 
Unity  and  Schism,  quoted,  142,  473, 

518. 
Unity,  destroyed  by  prelacy,  18,  19. 
Unreasonableness  of  prelacy,  82,  &c., 

107,  347,  &c.,  553,556-558. 
Unity,  christian,  explained,  425,  431, 

503,  504  ;  not  union,  426,  427. 
Ursuline  Manual,  quoted,  13. 
Usher,  Archbishop,  quoted,  7, 103, 135, 

157, 400, 403,  419, 430, 463,  494, 495, 

498,  530,  540. 

V. 
Vail,  Rev.  Thomas  H.,  corrected,  413, 

246. 
Vagan,  Rev.  Mr.,  quoted,  377. 
Vauohan's  Life  of  Wickliffe,  quoted, 

384. 
Vidal's    Commentaries    of   Mosheim, 

quoted,  309,  435,  436,  513. 
Vigilantius,  his  testimony,  205. 
Visible  church,  what,  488. 
Voetius,  quoted,  62, 184, 227, 471,  497, 

502. 
Vossius,  quoted,  190. 

W. 

Wake,  Archbishop,  quoted,  218,  266, 

399. 
Waldenses,  their  testimony,  204,  205. 
Warburton,  Bishop,  quoted,  8, 71, 395. 


568 


INDEX. 


Watchman,  the  Boston,  quoted,  419. 
Welles'  Vind.  of  Presb.  Ordin.  quoted, 

151,  252,  475. 
Wetmore,  Rev.  James,  quoted,  448. 
Whateley,   Archbishop,   quoted,  xvii, 

49,  50,  54,  79,  121,  148,  218,  240, 

245,  259,  269,  307. 
Whitby,  Dr.,  quoted,  136,  149,  239. 
White,   Bishop,   quoted,    71,  80,  1.50, 

180,218,  219, 311,  321, 383, 390, 403, 

405,410,412,421,509. 
Whitaker,  Dr.,  quoted,  18fi,  253. 
White,  Rev.  Hugh,  quoted,  169. 
Whitgift,  Archbishop,  quoted,  70,  396, 

496. 
WicklifFe,  quoted,  173. 
Willet,  Dr.,   quoted,  54,70,  71,119, 

121,  149,  186,  193,  223,  238,  246, 

390,  543,  549. 


Williams,  Bishop,  quoted,  45,  87,  199, 

549. 
Wilson's,    Dr.,    Memoirs    of   Bishop 

White,  405,  508. 
Wilson,  Daniel,    Bishop,  quoted,  269; 

his  high-churchism,  343. 
Wiseman,  Dr.,  quoted,  105,  272,  281. 
Wix,  Rev.  Samuel,  quoted,  296. 
Wordsworth's   Eccl.  Biography,  207, 

Y. 

Young,  Rev.  Thomas,  quoted,  324 


Zanchius,  quoted,  490. 
Zeph.  iii.  11,  quoted,  2. 
Zonarus,  536. 


Date  Due 

\ 

mm 

j^i_^Ji— _^ 

(|) 

